How Does The Criminal Justice System Accommodate Young Offenders?
In the golden ages it was believed that a child should be seen as a person and not as an object of concern however over time the treatment of children has been more enlightened.
The Child Savers organisation played a major part in the change in treatment of juveniles under the justice system. Their greatest accomplishment was the creation of a juvenile court in Chicago 1899. The court had two principles and they were formed on the basis that “juveniles were not ready to be held accountable for their actions” and “that they were not fully developed and could rehabilitate easier than adults.”
The United Nations convention on the rights of the child (UNCRC) was ratified by the United Kingdom in 1991. They expressed concerns on the use of custody for young offenders, the low age of criminal responsibility, and the lack of opportunities for children and young people to express views.
The current law states that anyone under the age of 18 must be tried in the Magistrates Court. The trial takes place in the Youth Court and has an informal procedure from which the general public and jury are excluded. However if a child or young person is charged with murder, manslaughter or an offence punishable by an adult with fourteen or more years’ imprisonment they will be tried in the Crown Court before a judge.
The standards regarding the minimum age of criminal responsibility are set in the “Beijing Rules”. Rule 4.1 states that
“In those legal systems recognizing the concept of the age of criminal responsibility for juveniles, the beginning of that age shall not be fixed at too low an age level, bearing in mind the facts of emotional, mental and intellectual maturity.”
The age of criminal responsibility differs widely according to history and culture and can range from 7 to 18 according to the political, social and economic arrangements of the particular state. In England and Wales the age of criminal responsibility is 10 but in Scotland it is 8, there has been proposals to raise it to 12 as the Children and Young Persons Act 1993 states that it shall no longer be presumed that a child under the age of 10 can be guilty of an offence.
Children between 10-14 will be treated equally as responsible as adults as the Crime and Disorder Act abolished the presumption that a child between those ages is incapable of committing an offence. This has been criticised as it was recommended in 1995 that the age of criminal responsibility should be raised however not only has the age not been raised but has effectively been lowered by the abolition of the presumption of doli incapax for 10 to 14 year olds. Therefore the age of criminal responsibility in Scotland remained at 8 years. The U.K government believes the age of 10 is reasonable and that from the age of 10 most children know the difference between right and wrong. There have been no current proposals to change the age of criminal responsibility in England and Wales although Scotland is proposing to raise the age to 12.
As for children in custody in Europe, the imprison rates are the highest amongst the rest in the world. Currently there are around 3,000 children in custody in England and Wales and 80% are held in prisons. The rest are held in privately run secure training centres or held in local authority secure children’s homes. There have also been many reports of children being treated poorly in custody. In 2005 Lord Carlile chaired an investigation after a 15 year old boy died in a secure training centre while being restrained by three staff. It was reported that their treatment “in any other circumstances, would trigger a child protection investigation and could even result in criminal charges.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3634412.stm
In court, children alleged or accused of infringement of the law are entitled to a fair trial which allows the child to effectively participate in the trial. A child needs to comprehend the charges and possible consequences and penalties in order to direct the legal representative and to challenge witnesses so they can provide an account of events and make appropriate decisions about evidence, testimony and the measures to be imposed.
Article 14 of the Beijing Rules states that the proceedings should be conducted in an atmosphere of understanding to allow the child to participate and to express himself/herself freely. Taking into account the child’s age and maturity may also require modified courtroom procedures and practices. An example of this took place in the case of T v UK and V v UK (2000). In the 2 months preceding the trial each applicant was taken by social workers to visit the courtroom and was introduced to trial procedures and personnel by way of a “child witness pack” containing books and games.
Children may suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder require immediate counselling but many children continued to be denied therapy prior to trial due to fear that the child’s evidence will be ‘contaminated’. Cross-examination may make a child feel it is being accused of telling lies this can be have serious longer term effects on the child’s mental health.
Some young defendants accused of committing serious crimes may be very young and very immature when standing trial in the Crown Court. The purpose of such trial is to determine guilt and decide the appropriate sentence if the young defendant pleads guilty or is convicted. The trial process should not itself expose the young defendant to avoidable intimidation, humiliation or distress. This is called the overriding principle. All possible steps should be taken to assist the young defendant to understand and participate in the proceedings. The ordinary trial process should, so far as necessary, be adapted to meet those ends.
http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/cms/926.htm
There are different special measures that take place to ensure that the child receives a fair trial. There may be screens placed around the witness box available for all vulnerable and intimidated witnesses to shield the witness from the defendant. The evidence can be given by a live link which enables the witness to give evidence during the trial from outside the court through a televised link to the court room. The Judges and barristers will remove their wigs and gowns which are normally worn in the Crown court to make the room appear less formal. Sometimes evidence is given in private which means that members of the public are not allowed into the courtroom when evidence is given or the evidence will be videotaped before the trial so that the witness need not give their initial evidence in person, but they do have to attend court to be cross examined on what they have said. They will be given aids to communication to enable the witness to give evidence through a communicator or interpreter. Lastly there will be an examination of the witness through an intermediary who may be appointed by the court to assist the witness to give their evidence in court.
Updated 16 March 2026
This article contains a number of legal inaccuracies and outdated statements that readers should be aware of.
Age of criminal responsibility in Scotland: The article states that Scotland’s age of criminal responsibility was 8 and that there were proposals to raise it to 12. This is now outdated. The Age of Criminal Responsibility (Scotland) Act 2019 raised the age of criminal responsibility in Scotland to 12, which came into full effect in February 2021. Scotland’s age is no longer 8.
Age of criminal responsibility in England and Wales: The article references a ‘Children and Young Persons Act 1993’ in relation to criminal responsibility. No such Act exists. The relevant provision abolishing the presumption of doli incapax is section 34 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998. The age of criminal responsibility in England and Wales remains 10. However, debate around raising it has continued. The UN Committee on the Rights of the Child has repeatedly called on the UK to raise the age, and various organisations have advocated for reform, but as of the date of this review no legislative change has been made in England and Wales.
Children in custody figures: The figures cited (around 3,000 children in custody, 80% in prisons) are significantly outdated. The number of children in custody in England and Wales has fallen substantially over the years. More recent data from the Youth Justice Board and Ministry of Justice shows the figure is now considerably lower, though concerns about conditions in custody and the use of restraint remain live issues.
Special measures: The article’s description of special measures for vulnerable witnesses is broadly accurate as a reflection of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999, which continues to govern this area. However, the legislative framework has been supplemented over the years, including by the Crime and Courts Act 2013 and associated Criminal Practice Directions, and pre-recorded cross-examination (Section 28 of the 1999 Act) has been rolled out more widely since the article was written.
Crown Court trial of children: The article’s statement that children charged with murder, manslaughter, or offences carrying 14 or more years’ imprisonment for adults will be tried in the Crown Court remains broadly correct as a matter of principle, though the detailed procedural framework is more nuanced than the article suggests.
Overall, while some of the general principles described remain relevant, several specific legal statements in this article are now materially inaccurate or outdated and should not be relied upon without further research.