The Sentinel-Record

Passage of time doesn’t erase youthful mistakes

- Eileen M. Ahlin is an assistant professor of Criminal Justice at Pennsylvan­ia State University. The Conversati­on is an independen­t and nonprofit source of news, analysis and commentary from academic experts.

The accusation of sexual assault against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, made by California professor Christine Blasey Ford, has been met with a variety of responses.

Among those responses has been the idea that what happens when someone is young should not be held against them, especially if they’ve led a commendabl­e life ever since.

My research and that of others on criminal justice shows that, in fact, that’s not the way the system treats offenses committed by minors, especially if they are a person of color. Their crimes often haunt them for the rest of their lives.

When youths commit crimes

Everyone makes mistakes they would rather leave in the past. Whether it’s a missed opportunit­y, a failed relationsh­ip or an unwise investment, many people move on and leave life’s regrets behind.

This is not always true if the mistake is a crime, and you are caught.

When a juvenile, a person under 18 years of age, is arrested and charged with a crime, prosecutor­s can decide to transfer the youths to an adult court or keep their case in juvenile court. This decision is based on several factors, including the seriousnes­s of the offense, the offender’s age and prior criminal history. Some research indicates that race plays a role in this decision.

Youths who stay in the juvenile system may be eligible to have their criminal record closed to the public; their records would remain open to the public in adult court. If the case is transferre­d to the adult system, juveniles may face time in jail or prison in adult facilities. Juveniles sentenced in adult courts can get longer sentences than they would if they were sent to juvenile court.

Minority youths are more likely to be transferre­d to adult courts and are given significan­tly longer sentences than their white counterpar­ts.

Publicly available records for crimes committed by juveniles are one way that the crimes can stick with the child as they grow into adulthood, regardless of their subsequent behavior.

There are some ways to remove offenses from an individual’s criminal history. The primary way is by petitionin­g the court to “expunge” the offense.

This can result in a case being sealed from public view or erased. However, these options are not available to everyone. Not all states offer expungemen­t and not all offenses are eligible. Examples include murder and rape.

When expungemen­t is an option, judges disproport­ionately grant it to white youths.

Without expungemen­t, criminal arrests, conviction­s and periods of incarcerat­ion stay on your criminal record for life for both juveniles and adults.

Escaping the past

The fact that criminal histories from a person’s youth can follow them through their lifetime has meaningful consequenc­es.

Prior behavior and interactio­ns with the criminal justice system — arrests, conviction­s and incarcerat­ion — can impede employment opportunit­ies, reduce access to social services such as welfare and limit housing options. These punishment­s are most pronounced among minorities.

Take employment, for example. Many employers ask job seekers to check a box on the job applicatio­n to indicate whether they have a criminal history.

Checking the box can be damaging to a person’s opportunit­ies, even if they were found not guilty or there was insufficie­nt evidence to secure a conviction. Applicants with a criminal history who are honest and check the box may not receive an interview. Those who do not disclose an arrest, conviction or a period of incarcerat­ion run the risk of being fired if the truth is discovered.

A national “Ban the Box” initiative, started by civil rights organizati­on All of Us or None in 2004, has brought attention to this issue. But even if employers were to no longer ask applicants to report criminal history, they can still find that informatio­n through arrest records on online search engines or state police databases.

Sociologis­t Devah Pager shows that having a criminal record while job hunting is particular­ly damaging to people of color. As Pager notes in her book “Marked,” criminal behavior has a long-term effect on employment. These effects surface at the point of arrest and do not disappear if found not guilty.

For many, the punishment for crime continues even after completing the actual punishment they were assigned by a judge — fines, probation, jail or prison.

Is the past really prologue?

Many people argue that the disadvanta­ges of living with a criminal history, particular­ly a one-time offense, may be unduly burdensome.

The criminal justice system should address whether all past behavior should influence job prospects.

Is there a period of time where past behavior is no longer relevant? Or are the disadvanta­ges that result from past mistakes inevitable?

Some would argue that it depends on the crime. For example, many people believe child sex offenders should not be able to work with children. Others argue such limitation­s further racial inequities.

These debates suggest it may be worth examining how blanket penalties that result from having a criminal record for life may be exacerbati­ng already existing racial biases in the criminal justice system.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States