Discussion

Although adjudicatory hearings for juveniles are similar to adult trials, there are some notable differences.  Do you believe these differences benefit juveniles or harm them?  Explain your opinion and provide support, using specific examples of differences between adjudicatory hearings and adult trials. 
Classmates response  
 Sean 
One of the differences between the juvenile and adult court hearing is that in the juvenile court there are no juries as in the adult cases, the juvenile cases are heard only by a judge. The juvenile courts are also private and not open to the public in order to help protect the identity of the juvenile in court. In the juvenile system there is a much greater emphasis on treating the juvenile with treatment or programs compared to the adult system where the offender is more likely to be sent to prison. A juvenile that is convicted will have their records sealed once they are an adult so they will not be held against them as an adult. In my opinion the juvenile system is a great benefit to them compared to the adult system. The goal is to have the juvenile learn from their mistakes and become a successful adult later in life. As long as they do not have very serious charges then they will be charged in juvenile court and have the opportunity to turn their lives in the right direction.    
Sergio
The main difference between Juvenile Adjudication hearings compared to adult trial is that adults can get tried, convicted, and sentenced to prison. The United States only grants the right to trial by Jury to adults only. Juveniles also are able to have their cases sealed/expunges if they meet specific conditions that is ordered by the judge. Also, when it comes to sentencing, the sentence must be what is best for the juvenile. When adults get sentenced, it is what best for the public and the sentencing is a punishment, but for a child the sentencing shall be a rehabilitation decision to steer the kid in the right path.