The case presents numerous violations of the teen-status offenses. As the officer at the scene, the processing of the four teens, three males and one female should be conducted differently. While all were found to be violation of the city ordinance regarding curfew laws, respective teens were found to hold additional changes. The analysis below outlines the status offense laws being violated by each teen, approaches to processing each one of them respectively, and procedure of handling an uncooperative teen at the scene. As well, an assessment of how to handle an uncooperative parent(s) is essential to determine key decisions that ought to be made in case.
Status Offense Laws Being Violated by Each Teen
In the first place, all of the four teens are bound to be charged with the violation of the city ordinance curfew hours. The four of them were caught by the office at 1 a.m. Also, the four teens proved to be ungovernable beyond the control of their parents or guardians. This is informed by the fact, a teen under the control of the parent or guardian cannot be allowed to be outside to that late night (Arthur & Waugh, 2008). The respective charges are in addition to the aforementioned violations.
The female teen found in possession of a cigarette was bound to be charged with the violation of use of tobacco regulation. Smoking for underage is unacceptable in the state requiring the arresting officer to charge her with possession and use of tobacco.
Two of the male teens found in possession of alcohol cans were expected to be charged with the violation of underage possession and consumption of alcohol (Freiburger& Burke, 2011). As minors, severe measures are essential to ensure the change from the behavior. As well, this is critical to discouraging them from becoming addicts.
The last male teen was expected to be charged with being uncooperative.
Processing Each of the Underage Teen Violators at the Scene
The procedure to process the underage teens at the scene for the violation of several laws various counts should be conducted individually while others are held as a group. The collective charges include violating of the city ordinance regarding curfew and proving to be ungovernable. The fact that they are underage and were found late in the night proves that they were ungovernable (Jaros, 2018). The charges applied equally to all four of the teens.
The respective charges were subject to follow after the collective charges were executed. This is respect to the additional violations that the individual teen was found to break. This allows additional consequences to be incurred by those found in possession of alcohol and tobacco. Each additional charge varied in terms of consequence it was bound to attract.
Handling of the Teen-Status Offense Violators Who is Uncooperative at the Scene
The use of force was necessary to handle the cooperative teen at the scene. This is vital to enable the officer at the scene take control of the situation that could potential take a different turn. Dealing with drunkard teens and in the influence of drugs required additional measures to ensure they cooperated (Jaros, 2018). For example, handcuffing of the uncooperative teen was essential to put them in line. The attracted reactive decisions that would be equal to the level of lack of cooperation.
How Having an Uncooperative Parent Would Affect My Decision on How to Handle the Case
The state of dealing with an uncooperative parent or two is different because they were not the ones found to be breaking the law. Also, parents were recipients of information rather than being active participants. A number of reasons can be used to inform the uncooperativeness of the parent such as losing control and hope on the child. This can alter and sour the relationship between the parent causing the parent to be uncooperative. Therefore, as the officer at the scene, decisions should and are not bound to be influenced by the parent’s cooperation or lack of it, rather, respective teen’s actions. Therefore, continuing to process the charges is implemented based on the actions of the respective teen.
Arthur, P. J., & Waugh, R. (2008). Status Offenses and the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act: The. Seattle Journal for Social Justice, 7(2), 10.
Freiburger, T. L., & Burke, A. S. (2011). Status offenders in the juvenile court: The effects of gender, race, and ethnicity on the adjudication decision. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 9(4), 352-365.
Jaros, M. C. (2018). The Double-Edged Sword of ParensPatriae: Status Offenders and the Punitive Reach of the Juvenile Justice System. Notre Dame L. Rev., 94, 2189.