Prosecuting Children
Kaitlin Dryburgh
The riots this summer revealed some of the most abhorrent behaviour and hatred that runs through the UK. Although Scotland didn’t experience rioters on the street that doesn’t mean it isn’t immune. For any Muslim or immigrant living in the UK life has been made so much difficult. Since the riots hate crimes have been on the rise.
Since the first brick was thrown the police arrested hundreds, and subsequently we’ve seen them trickle through the courts. In an effort to show we’re being tough on those who attacked emergency workers, tried to set fire to asylum seekers, and had hotel staff believing they were witnessing there very last moments, the UK has embarked on a large-scale name and shame exercise. The BBC for example has had live feeds updating on the recent convictions of the day, faces plastered all over the stories, and even an interactive database where you can search perpetrators by their crimes.
Personally, there’s something about it that doesn’t quite sit right. It’s not so much the naming and shaming, but that it’s almost structured for enjoyment and participation. I feel like one of those people who turned up to a public hanging back in the 1800’s, I’m just not sure if it’s the best way forward for justice and most importantly changing the tide on racism. Does it really seek to stop the rise of far-right rhetoric?
Yet, these live updates really give a sense of the involvement of children. Of the over 700 people arrested (and rising) around 150 of them were juveniles aged 10-17. Shockingly around 35 of those were 14 and under.
Today (Tuesday 17th) two further juveniles were sentenced, and they too had the public shaming experience, although their names were withheld. National news outlets really going to town and making an example of these children. Unsurprisingly the Daily Mail running stories titled “Shame of the child”, while even the BBC running headlines that do nothing more than show the deplorability of these criminals.
What they did was violent, it was disgusting, and their actions have no place. But why are we criminalising a 12 in the same manner as we would a 35-year-old?
Read a little more about this 12-year-old and one of the mitigating factors presented to the judge was alcohol problems.
Let’s pause for a second. Think back to when you were twelve. What were you doing? What were you thinking about? What did your home life look like?
For the majority of people at that age you’ve probably just moved to high school. You’re concerned about your pals at school and what you’re having for dinner that night. You might be involved in sports, or music after school. You’re trying to figure stuff out and maybe pushing boundaries a bit more.
Not everyone had a home-life like that, but the quite a lot did. Now try and think of your 12-year-old-life self with a drinking problem, lobbing stones at police, chanting racial slurs and looting the local shop. I can’t. I’m lucky enough to say that was worlds away from my life as a 12-year-old
Think of what it would have taken a child to get to that place, what kind of family life do they have, what is school like, and their relationships?
Now we’re supposed to believe they chose to be there. To a point that’s true, accountability for one’s actions should never be overlooked but is it justifiable that the judge highlights the this was simply a choice? A 12-year-old with an alcohol problem has already started to run out of choices, and very early on in their life.
The criminalisation of children that we’ve seen should not be taken lightly. A child that has become part of a riot is a very sorry story.
Instead of creating some media fan-fair why aren’t we delving into the question of why they were they in the first place? Many carers and adults that cast influence over their life were also there. The irony of rioting because of violence against children and simultaneously exposing your own child to unseen levels of violence and hatred is to beggar belief.
Children’s charities and even the chair of the Youth Justice Board has warned that the prosecution of children should only be taken as a last resort. The justice system shouldn’t make any swift decisions and should very much consider mitigating factors when reviewing cases. It really doesn’t seem that this has been the case.
The twelve-year-old with alcohol problems, who was no longer in school and references to his home life paints a picture of longer living with his mum now has to live with the consequences of his actions for the rest of his life. The decision to convict means he has a criminal record. The media has summarised his existence as a stain on society. Which is very much a pastime of the British media, making a mockery of the working class.
Before the riots this boy was already ostracized by society. Alienated from school, no trust in authorities, and poor family relationships. Most likely he probably already felt like he had no space in society, no one was helping him. So what do we think a criminal record will achieve? Well we’ve probably just confirmed what maybe he already thought, we don’t give a shit about him.
Does that really achieve justice? I would have thought justice would have been achieved by making sure he was accountable for his actions, and that he was given the help to change so it doesn't happen again.
The image of a child in a balaclava screaming hatred, causing damage to the very community they’re growing up in is a stark difference to the child whose mother went on holiday instead of going court. A different 12-year-old hit the headlines as it transpired his mother had decided to go on holiday instead of turning up for her son when he was due to be sentenced. It paints a sad picture. It doesn’t excuse his actions, but my god it gives a little insight into how this has come about.
Both of these boys avoided youth prison.
The situation should have never occurred that a child would become a part of a riot. It’s a failure at every step to create this outcome. The justice system is the last stop for turning everything around, and in the case of children this is especially true. In the case of these two boys they were handed a mixture of curfews and referral orders. While parents were hit with a compensation bill and parenting courses. But where is the real intervention?
After the 2011 riots which had a whopping 485 children participating a fair amount of research was carried out. For example it was found that two thirds of those children were identified as having special educational needs. But more importantly they looked at the facilitators and the inhibitors for those who got involved and those who didn’t. Some of the most influential factors identified were peer pressure, information sharing, authoritative figures in their life, attitudes towards authority, life prospects, community attachment, belonging, and poverty.
In all the proceedings I am fairly certain that nothing was done to address any of these issues. Referral orders some would perhaps argue aided in community attachment as the restorative measures with community victims might address this. However, I’m not sure it combats the national headlines that are although rightly angry, show little understanding of the fact these are children, with difficult upbrings. Their sense of belonging, attitude towards authority, and community attachment in further tatters.
There were several youths who did end up in youth prison. I’m really not sure what restorative or rehabilitation can be achieved in six months when situated in a hellhole. As one 18-year-old will find out.