Teen offenders judged by peers

Gavin Ferris, 15, stood as he delivered his opening statement as prosecutor. His partner, Andrew Smith, 16, and defense counsel, Rebecca Anderson, 15, and A.J. Perry, 14, listen. Maggie Beck/Union Democrat, copyright 2009

The program, in its 10th year, is a collaborative effort by the Tuolumne County Superior Court, Probation Department, Superintendent of Schools Office, area high schools and local law enforcement.
 

“It’s a real court proceeding,” said Cheryl Barton, director of student and media services at the county schools office.

The Probation Department determines which juvenile criminal cases would be suited for Peer Court, Barton said, and cases are heard in Superior Court.

She said the community gives the program “great support.”

Last Wednesday night, a jury of 11 students listened to arguments by two-student prosecution and defense teams.

The arguments were not to determine guilt, which is done in the normal judicial process, but to come up with an appropriate punishment, which is approved by a presiding judge, in this case Commissioner Kim Knowles.

Students also take on the roles of court bailiff and court clerk.

Students who take part in Peer Court are volunteers and cite a variety of reasons for their participation, including aspirations of becoming attorneys.

“My dad is a school law attorney and I want to be an attorney,” said Andrew Smith, 16, of Sonora High School, who acted as a prosecuting attorney Wednesday. “I thought this would be a cool experience to set me up for my future job.”

Court Clerk Kevin Baum, 16, of Summerville High School, said he is interested in learning more about the law and workings of the criminal justice system.

Sonora High student juror Danny West, 14, said he thought it would be a good experience and that he wanted “to help other students going through difficulties because we all go through them.”

Sonora High student Isaac Sanchez, 14, said he participated to learn about trials and helping the community.

“And to see if justice is carried out in the right way,” Sanchez said.

Knowles told students, “This is a real session. This is not a mock trial or mock court.”

It was not necessary to have 12 jurors, but the 11 students must have a consensus on sentencing, she told students.

Area attorneys help students prepare for Peer Court by telling them proper procedures and ideas on areas they need to explore, as well as some direction, said mentor Mark Borden, a Sonora-based criminal law attorney.  

“It’s like shaping a piece of clay,” Borden said.

Deputy District Attorney Dee Shepherd said she enjoys working with young people and it’s her way of giving back to the community.

“It’s fun to see how they approach things, their perspectives,” Shepherd said. “They’re sometimes innovative in their approach.”

“It’s an interesting look into the mind of teenagers,” Barton said. “It’s a great experience for the high school kids. We want them to see that it’s an important thing in the community to be a jury member.”

In the 10 years of Peer Court, 64 out of 67 students completed their sentences, Barton said.

“We’ve had a really good track record,” Barton said.

There are five Peer Court sessions over the course of the school year and each involves one to two cases, Barton said.

“We really believe it’s a great way to give them a second chance ... to make better choices in the future,” Barton said.

The case Wednesday night involved two teenage boys who admitted stealing two 30-packs of beer from a Sonora-area business.

The prosecution called a sheriff’s sergeant and a probation officer to testify, and the defense called both boys’ fathers. Each side was given the opportunity to give opening and closing arguments and cross-examine witnesses.

Each side also gave sentencing recommendations to the jury.

In this case, the prosecution recommended ordering the boys to take a tour of the county jail and do 20 hours of community service and impose a curfew on them for six months.

Peer Court juries can impose any number of sentencing options including jail tours, community service, law enforcement ride-alongs, imposition of a restraining order, writing a letter of apology, or another logical sentence decided by the jury, Knowles said. Defendants also can be ordered to write 1,000 word essays.

However, when jurors returned, they handed down this sentence: a tour of the jail and participation in “Every 15 Minutes,” a mock-DUI accident program put on by area high schools.

If participation in the program is not possible, the jury recommended touring a tow yard to see vehicles wrecked in DUI accidents.

During witness testimony, it was stated that both boys had written and hand-delivered letters of apology to the business. They were also punished by their athletic coaches and grounded by their parents.

Following the announcement of the recommended sentence, Knowles questioned each juror on his or her reasoning. 

“I think it’s pretty powerful for the defendants to hear what their peers think of what they did,” Barton said.  

Juror Hillary Lupo, 17, said community service wasn’t imposed because both boys play sports and work, so they wouldn’t have time. Plus, they’d been punished by their parents and coaches.

Juror Tori Selesia, 17, said a curfew wasn’t imposed because the defendants’ parents only allow them to go to school, sports practice, work and home. 

“Their parents seem to have it handled,” Selesia said.

Jurors told Knowles the boys admitted they stole the beer and were sorry.

“They just made a stupid decision,” said juror Emily Powers, of the Connections Performing and Visual Arts Academy.

The jurors told Knowles they weren’t as concerned about the theft as they were about the amount of alcohol stolen, which could have been given to other teens.

Juror Rachael Reese, 16, said: “We figured it would be on their hands if they had a party and people drove drunk.”

“We hope it opens their eyes to see what could happen,” said juror Justine Abbott, 15.

When Knowles asked jurors if they had anything else to add, West addressed the defendants: “You’re good kids. This doesn’t make you a bad person.”

“That’s so true,” Knowles said. “Just because there is one bump in the road doesn’t mean there has to be more.”