Has the age of criminal liability been raised?
#1
Posted 15 May 2011 - 03:55 PM
After doing a bit of 'Googling' I've found a recent 'popular newspaper' article which says the age was raised to 12 years old on 28th March 2011.
Is it true?
#2
Posted 15 May 2011 - 03:58 PM
#3
Posted 15 May 2011 - 04:36 PM
How come they raised it?
#4
Posted 15 May 2011 - 04:52 PM
I see. I presume the under 16 rule still exist, then?Sort of... I can't recall the exact phrasing but basically we can only report to Children's Panels now for children up to 12. We can do the normal arrest/detain as nescessary still.
The lowest age of criminal liability in Europe would bring it into a more precise prospective.So for years Scotland was lower than England and Wales but now its the other way round?
This may have contributed to the decision as well as high profile cases were the age increase would result in no prosecution:How come they raised it?
Also, the LA herself, Elish Angiolini, was quoted to say the age is "extremely low" and she wouldn't normally prosecute children. Plus JS Kenny MacAskill said "prosecution at an early age increases the chance of reoffending - so this change is about preventing crime."Here SHELLEY MATHESON looks at kids under 12 - some as young as TWO - who have been investigated for breaking the law.
LAST year, LOTHIAN AND BORDERS police revealed a three-year-old had maliciously damaged a car, a seven-year-old was caught carrying a knife and 21 five-year-olds were reported for assault, theft, vandalism and breach of the peace.
In DUMFRIES AND GALLOWAY, five tots including two four-year-olds were quizzed about crimes such as theft of a bike, petty assault and vandalism.
In TAYSIDE, 48 kids were booked for committing crimes including one child for racially aggravated conduct. Shoplifting was also rife among underage kids in the area, with 12 seven-year-olds being grilled by cops.
Police in FIFE recorded 21 crimes committed by children including assault and breach of the peace while Northern Constabulary recorded 13 mini offenders for crimes including vandalism and petty assault.
STRATHCLYDE Police also revealed that one three-year-old was among 35 child offenders who were caught committing a variety of crimes including house breaking with intent to steal and assault. Two six year olds were investigated for fire raising in Scotland.
There have also been high-profile criminal cases over the years.
Richard Keith, now 24, was just 11 when he battered and drowned three-year-old Jamie Campbell and dumped his body.
In 2003, a gang of kids, including an 11-year-old boy, were charged in connection with 22 car thefts and a string of break-ins.
And in 2006, a two-year-old toddler faced claims of vandalism.
#5
Posted 15 May 2011 - 07:08 PM
How come they raised it?
It was one of the lowest, if not the lowest, age of responsibility in the world. Lots of other European countries have age 14.
#6
Posted 15 May 2011 - 07:11 PM
It was one of the lowest, if not the lowest, age of responsibility in the world. Lots of other European countries have age 14.
I wonder if senior officers would be in favour of raising it to 14, just think of how crime levels will drop instantly overnight if we didnt record crimes/offenders under 14
#7
Posted 15 May 2011 - 08:04 PM
"the Bill as introduced sought to amend current legal provisions so as to prevent any child under the age of 12 being prosecuted in the criminal courts. It did not seek to alter the legal presumption that no child under the age of eight years can be guilty of any offence. The result of this would be that a child aged between eight and 12 could still be held to have the mental capacity to commit a crime but could, where some form of compulsory intervention is considered necessary, only be dealt with through the children’s hearings system." From here
Given the massive infrequency with which an under 12 would actually be prosecuted rather than reported to a Children's Panel it is more correcting the annomaly that any under 12s would be prosecuted - the notion that for example child murders were less in need of the holisitc approach of the children's panels and instead just needed locking up by the courts. It won't really affect the day to day life of any Scottish beat cop.
#8
Posted 15 May 2011 - 10:56 PM
In the UK we have one of the youngest criminal responsibility ages in the world, with the Youngest being Switzerland at 7 years.
Edited by 098qa, 16 May 2011 - 09:20 PM.
#9
Posted 15 May 2011 - 11:30 PM
Criminal responsibility within the UK still stands at 10 years of age, however, there are guidelines which essentially don't recommend prosecuting for not-so-serious offences under the age of 12.
In the UK we have one of the youngest criminal responsibility ages in the world, with the Youngest being Switzerland at 7 years, then you have the US and Belgium criminal responsibility set at 18 years of age.
That is simply not true. "The UK" means nothing in terms of the age of criminal responsibility - Scotland, England & Wales and Northern Ireland are different and could choose different ages independently of one another. Scotland's age of criminal responsibility is 8, that has not changed, NI and E&W currently have 10 as the minimum age.
Plus the USA in no way has 18 as the age of criminal responsibility! For starters one of the reasons they don't sign up the UN Convention on Rights of the Child is that a few states (Texas) like to be able to execute people who were 17 when they committed a crime! Plenty of cases see minors "tried as an adult". Wikipedia (I know...) says that it ranges from 6 to 12 with a fallback if a state doesn't define it to a common law 7.
So that also means Switzerland doesn't have the youngest at 7...
Edit to add quick proof that Oklahoma has an age limit of 7. Plus to add North Carolina has 16 as its base age of "you're definitely in adult court now"
Edited by CmdKeen, 15 May 2011 - 11:34 PM.
#10
Posted 16 May 2011 - 01:56 AM
Criminal responsibility within the UK still stands at 10 years of age, however, there are guidelines which essentially don't recommend prosecuting for not-so-serious offences under the age of 12.
As CmdKeen has said, quite simply; wrong.
0 user(s) are browsing this forum
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users




















