Biological Perspectives in Understanding Juvenile Culpability HAQ: Center for Child Rights B1/2, Ground Floor, Malviya Nagar New Delhi - 110017 Tel: +91-26677412,26673599 Fax: +91-26674688 Website: www.haqcrc.org FaceBook Page: https://www.facebook.com/HaqCentreForChildRights

2. “Juvenile” - person -not completed 18 years
Biologically - transformation of adolescent
beginning with puberty to physically mature adults
Psychologically – understood in terms of the
developmental tasks - central task of achieving a
personal identity
Sociologically- in terms of their status within society
- transitional period in the attainment of adulthood

3. In time child is taught about the consequence of
his/her actions/ take responsibility
The age when children are expected to develop and
display socially acceptable, morally and legally
appropriate behavior varies
display socially acceptable, morally and legally
appropriate behavior varies
Society is redefining the criteria and the timeframe
by when are children expected to be responsible
Society making rules for upbringing them in an
enriching environment
Society is making various laws and acts towards
nurturance and containing those in conflict with law

4. Juvenile delinquency - participation in illegal
behavior by minors (juveniles).
Legal systems prescribe specific procedures for
dealing with juveniles, such as juvenile
detention centers, and courts
dealing with juveniles, such as juvenile
detention centers, and courts
From a psychological perspective,
important to understand what juvenile
offending entails,
what are the reasons for such behavior,
whether some of ‘delinquent’ behavior could
actually be just ‘normative ‘behaviour?

5. According to the Juvenile Justice, (Care &
Protection of Children) Act, 2000 as amended
in 2011, “ A juvenile in conflict with the law
means a person who is alleged to have
committed an offence and has not completedcommitted an offence and has not completed
eighteenth year of age as on the date of
commission of such offence”. “Offence means
an offence punishable under any law for the
time being in force “

6. Minimum age of exemption for prosecution and
punishment is based on mens rea
Criminal responsibility (India)- 7 years (IPC sec 82, 1860
8 to 12 years (Sec 83 of IPC): “Nothing is an offence .. > 7
years and < 12 years…not attained .. understanding toyears and < 12 years…not attained .. understanding to
judge nature & consequences ..”
No such immunity between 12 to 18 years
Juvenile booked for criminal acts - cannot be treated or
sentenced in the same manner as adults
Article 37 of CRC- Capital punishment/ Life imprisonment
without possibility of release, cannot be imposed < 18 yrs
Determination of juvenility based on age at date of offence

7. Debate was thought to be between advocates of a
more rehabilitation-focused juvenile system and
those who see proportionality and retribution as
equally (or more) legitimate goals that must be
achieved when dealing with serious juvenile crime
Proportionality between the seriousness of the harm,
the culpability of the actor and the severity of
punishment constitutes the foundation of criminal
sanctions
What if the ‘actor’ is not culpable !! (then justice is
not being served)

8. ‘Mature’ - culture, convenience, historical precedent
Aristotle- 21 (completed three 7-year stages of youth dev)
Middle Ages- 21 (wearing a full suit of armor)Middle Ages- 21 (wearing a full suit of armor)
Neuroscience – frontal lobe – executive functioning- 25 yrs

9. Conventionally – its known that adol. are reckless
Supported by research on developmental changes in
impulsivity and self-management
Firstly- synaptic pruning in PFC – during mid-
adolescence -basic abilities and logical reasoningadolescence -basic abilities and logical reasoning
Secondly- changes in the dopamine related neurons -
limbic region- (emotions, rewards & punishments)
and prefrontal regions (executive functions)
Dopamine- very active at this stage, critical role in
experiencing pleasure, ~pleasure seeking behaviour

10. Thirdly, increased myelination of neurons in
prefrontal cortex, continues till early adulthood
Better connectivity in PFC - important for higher
order cognitive functions (planning ahead, weighingorder cognitive functions (planning ahead, weighing
risk and rewards and complicated decision making)
Fourthly, better connectivity between PFC and limbic
regions (self control + emotional regulation)

11. Reward centres are hypersensitive, more in
anticipation than on getting reward
This hypersensitivity is more in presence of peer
Heightened sensitivity to anticipated reward,Heightened sensitivity to anticipated reward,
coupled with immaturity of centres of higher
cognitive functioning implicated in judgment leads
to irrational behaviours in group
Adult brain - extensive connections within the brain,
not hypersensitive to anticipation of a reward, less
influenced by presence of peer and are geared to
function as ‘adults’

12. Peer
influence
Poor risk
assessment
More weight
to short term
consequence
of choice
Deviant
conduct
Sensation
seeking
of choice
Poor impulse
control

13. Is the mind mature to understand the implications and
most importantly act in accordance
Depends on : basic cognitive functions, higher order
cognitive functions (impulse control, judgment, planning
ahead) and emotional regulationahead) and emotional regulation
Neuroscience – areas of brain associated with basic
cognitive capacity (intelligence) for holding information
and assimilating them is the first one to mature.
Emotional intelligence which involves higher order
thinking and impulse control are the last to evolve by
late adolescence and early adulthood.
Adolescents mature intellectually before they mature
socially or emotionally

14. Different parts of the brain mature along different
timetables
Executive thinking may not reach its peak until 25 but
most function adequately at an earlier age--probably
between 16 and 21.between 16 and 21.
Parts that govern impulsivity, judgment, planning for the
future, foresight of consequences, and other
characteristics that make people morally culpable,
continue till early adulthood, between 21 and 25.
Intelligence and adult ways to self-regulate all converge
towards adult capacity closer to the age of 21 years
which could be defined as ‘neurobiological’ age of
maturity

15. (1987) 14 juveniles on death row
9 had major neuropsychological disorders
7 had psychotic disorders since early childhood
12 had IQ scores under 90.
11 had below average reading abilities and another three had
learned to read only after arriving on death rowlearned to read only after arriving on death row
12 reported having been physically or sexually abused,
including five who were sodomized by relatives

16. 2003, Study of traumatic experiences in the lives of death
row juvenile offenders (US)
74% experienced family dysfunction
60% were victims of abuse and/or neglect
43% had a diagnosed psychiatric disorder43% had a diagnosed psychiatric disorder
38% suffered from substance addictions
38% lived in poverty
> 30% of death row juvenile offenders had experienced six
> distinct areas of childhood trauma (avg 4/ offender)
Most C/ A do not face even one of these
Such mitigating evidence was presented to juries in fewer
than half of the offenders’ trials.

17. Reducing the age has brought a lot of adolescents,
even for minor misdemeanors into the adult court
Are starting to rethink the wisdom of sending 13-year-
olds to spend hard time among older criminals.
Youths (previously tried as adults)- 34 % more likely to
commit a crime again (than those exposed to Juvenile
justice system.
Not only do young offenders treated as adults reoffend
sooner and more frequently, they're also more likely to
go on to commit violent crimes.

18. Useful to predict reoffending: instrumental voilence
Vs impulsive emotional retaliation
Factors to evaluate:
Appreciation of wrongfulness, ability to conform
to law,
Developmental course of aggression and
impulsivity,
Psychosocial immaturity (incl susceptibility to peer
pressure, risk-taking, and ability to empathize),
Environmental circumstances, peer group norms,
Out-of-character action, mental illness, and
Reactive attitudes toward the offense

19. Risk assessment is central to many decision in
criminal justice process.
In Ireland, Young Persons Probation Services use a
general risk assessment scale named ‘The Youth
Level of Service/ Case Management Inventory’Level of Service/ Case Management Inventory’
(YLS/CMI)
Such scale is required to be filled every six months
Help identify a range of factors ranging from
psychopathy to socio-economic problems
To plan appropriate intervention plan but also help
measure changes in needs and risk of reoffending
over time

20. Culpability: Acting with free will, undertaking an
action with criminal purpose and having full moral
agency (ability to make moral and ethical decisions)
Are adolescents culpable? Should they be excused?
Receive mitigated sentence
Excuse- complete exculpation (binary judgement)Excuse- complete exculpation (binary judgement)
Mitigation – places culpability on a continuum
Mitigation –
Decision making capacity being impaired
Compelling external circumstances
Act out of character, not a product of bad character

21. Adolescents level of cognitive and psychosocial
development are likely to shape their choices,
different from adults. Don’t have competent decision
making capacity
Adolescents’ decision-making capacities are
immature and their autonomy constrained, they areimmature and their autonomy constrained, they are
more vulnerable than are adults to the influence of
coercive circumstances that mitigate culpability for
all persons, such as provocation, duress, threat, peer
influence
Adolescents are in process of forming their personal
identity, thus criminal behaviour is less likely than
that of an adult to reflect bad character

22. Balance age of the juvenile and culpability while
factoring in developmental processes and socio-
cultural operatives
Growing up is a process, not a birthday
Adolescents have significant neurologicalAdolescents have significant neurological
deficiencies that result in stark limitations of
judgment.
Risk factors (neglect, abuse, poverty, etc.) can set the
psychological stage for violence
Adolescents are less morally culpable for their
actions than competent adults and are more capable
of change and rehabilitation

23. Punishment for minors is contrary to the idea of fairness
Our justice system accords the greatest punishments to the
most blameworthy
Juvenile offender, developmentally immature, should be
viewed as less culpable than a comparable adult offenderviewed as less culpable than a comparable adult offender
But not as an actor without any responsibility for the crime
Juvenile offenders should be held responsible
a strong message about the costs of crime
community is protected from those who might offend again
Policy based on mitigation can achieve these goals while it
recognizes that youths are less culpable than adults

24. Juvenile legislation (India) –
Balance ‘welfarism’ with ‘justice’,
Giving the social aspect of juvenile due regard
‘Best interest of the child’- central guiding principle
Some advocate waiver system (those in grey area, by
their age or the nature of crime)their age or the nature of crime)
Transfer to the adult criminal justice system
Other countries (methods of transfer)
Expanded the set of crimes that qualified for transfer
Statutory exclusion
prosecutorial discretion

25. Transfer is not viable option (Juvenile not as culpable
& it does not reduce juvenile crime or recidivism)
Adult criminal system is not geared for sensitively
handling adolescents
Further isolation, stigmatization and
desocialization
Susceptible to further violence
Need to strengthen the existing juvenile justice
system
Upgrading the existing Special Homes under the JJ
Act with more specialized and individualized
approaches

26. Aims of Juvenile justice
treatment of children in conflict with the law
Address the root causes of offending behaviour and
Measures to prevent such behaviour.
Emphasis on prevention and rehabilitationEmphasis on prevention and rehabilitation
Launching awareness-raising campaigns and
developing national action plans for juveniles at risk
and young people in conflict with the law
Activities towards developing training curricula and
conducting training courses for the JCL

27. Access to mental health and psychiatric services
Assessment of risk factors
Intensive counseling, family counseling, life skills
education
Improving detention condition for juveniles through
refurbishing specialized centres,refurbishing specialized centres,
Setting up filing systems and strengthening
vocational and educational training programmes
Establishing after care programme for juveniles
released from closed institutions in collaboration
with non-governmental community services

28. Laurence Steinberg. Should the science of adolescent brain development inform public policy?
Issues in science and technology.Spring 2002;67-78.
Elizabeth S. Scott, Laurence Steinberg. Adolescent Development and the Regulation of Youth
Crime. Juvenile Justice. Volume 18; Number 2;Fall; 2008.
Elizabeth R. Sowell, Paul M. Thompson, Kevin D. Tessner, and Arthur W. Toga. Mapping
Continued Brain Growth and Gray Matter Density Reduction in Dorsal Frontal Cortex: Inverse
Relationships during Postadolescent Brain Maturation. The Journal of Neuroscience, 15 November
2001, 21(22): 8819-8829
Gardner, Margo; Steinberg, Laurence. Peer Influence on Risk Taking, Risk Preference, and Risky
Decision Making in Adolescence and Adulthood: An Experimental Study. Developmental
Psychology, Vol 41(4), Jul 2005, 625-635
Sowell, E.R., B.S. Peterson, et al. 2003. Mapping cortical change across the human life span. Nature
Neuroscience 6(March):309–315
Lewis, DO, Pincus, Bard, Richardson, Prichep, Feldman, Yeager. Neuropsychiatric,
psychoeducational, and family characteristics of 14 juveniles condemned to death in the Unitedpsychoeducational, and family characteristics of 14 juveniles condemned to death in the United
States. Am. J. of Psychiatry. 1988.145.
Mallett, Chris. Socio-Historical Analysis of Juvenile Offenders on Death Row, 3 Juv. Corr. Mental
Health Report. 2003. 65.
Myers DL. The recidivism of violent youths in juvenile and adult court: A consideration of selection
bias. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice. 2003;1(1):79–101.
Thomas A. Loughran, Edward P. Mulvey et al. Differential Effects of Adult Court Transfer on
Juvenile Offender Recidivism. Law Hum Behav. 2010 December; 34(6): 476–488.
Fontaine, Reid Griffith. Social information processing, subtypes of violence, and a progressive
construction of culpability and punishment in juvenile justice. ; International Journal of Law and
Psychiatry, Vol 31(2), Mar, 2008. pp. 136-149
Ash, Peter. But he knew it was wrong: Evaluating adolescent culpability. Journal of the American
Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, Vol 40(1), Jan 1, 2012. pp. 21-32.
Youth Justice Board (2000) Asset London: Youth Justice Board
Bonnie, R., Coughlin, A., & Jeffries, J. (Eds.).(1997). Criminal law. New York: Foundation Press.
Kadish, S. (1987).Excusing crime.California Law Review, 75, 257–296.
Morse, S. (1994). Culpability and control.Pennsylvania Law Review.142,1587–1660.