Juveniles convicted of murder in Massachusetts are now eligible for parole after 20-30 years on a 3 tier basis depending on the facts of their case. First degree felony murder becomes eligble after 20-30 years, first degree premeditated murder after 25-30 years, and first degree murder “with extreme cruelty” is only after 30 years.
But some critics, like Jon Keller don’t agree. His claim increasing mandatory minimums for juveniles convicted of 1st degree murder would “send a message” is nonsensical and cruel. And there is no evidence that higher sentences have any deterrent effect, particularly on kids who are not seriously considering the consequences of deadly and risky decisions.
Massachusetts lawmakers responded to revise the mandatory minimum sentences for juveniles convicted of murder after a Massachusetts high court ruled that prior sentences of life without parole were Unconstitutional and thrown out. Both the US Supreme Court and the Massachusetts SJC determined that life without parole for juveniles is unconstitutional on grounds of cruel and unusual punishment. So the legislature crafted legislation to respond with new standards for convicts convicted as juveniles.
Yes, these cases are horrific, and the pain and torment these families have suffered in immeasurable, and absolutely tragic. But the proposed 35 year minimum sentence advocated for victim’s family groups was far too high.
Victims families advocate for 35 year minimum before parole eligibility. (Photo David L Ryan/Globe Staff)
Mandatory minimums take judgement out of the hands of judges or parole boards. There should not be a “one size fits all” solution. And just because a person is eligible for parole doesn’t mean that it should be granted.
Of course there are cases where the crime is so monstrous and premeditated that the individual continues to be a danger to society, even after decades behind bars.
But it is also very possible that after 15 years it is just not the same person. A vicious act as a teen does not mean that the person is the same in their 30s. And the simple fact is that the the victims family members are not the appropriate people to make that judgement.
The Massachusetts Criminal Justice Policy Coalition advocated for a maximum of 20-30 years in all cases, and believes in the “unique capacity of youth to change and be rehabilitated.”
Serious studies have shown that immature brains are more reckless, and more likely to get involved in sensation seeking behavior and criminal activity. None of this excuses a murder charge, or makes the families of victims feel any better, but it is an established fact of brain development.
Injury Cases vs Criminal Penalties
A personal injury case or negligence case is not the same a a criminal case, so the analogy Jon Keller used in his piece is of off-base and is incorrect. Tort law is about injury to a person, and compensation. Criminal law is about a violation of community standards as codified in the criminal statutes.
There is a reason why the victim or the victims family is not the Plaintiff in a criminal case. It is the Commonwealth vs. the defendant. It is our collective responsibility to enforce the laws. And murder victims can still seek compensatory damages in civil court.
Simply put, we don’t punish criminal for the benefit of victims, we do it for all of us. The anger and loss felt by these families are beyond any of us to question and judge. Our hearts go out to them.
But their feelings are inherent biased, and that isn’t how the criminal justice system should work.
Parole Cases Are Coming Before the Board Now
This bill is not retroactive, so the 60 people in Massachusetts prisons convicted of murder as juveniles are coming before the board after the default parole-eligible period of 15 years. Two men were granted parole on August 7th, and more hearings will be forthcoming.
