Stupid Kids . . . I know they stole our bikes but . . .

[OakLeaf]

There is also another perspective that says if they wind up getting off on a misdemeanor, then they may not learn anything from the experience.

The other half of it though, is that while a felony conviction will have way more long term consequences, they're also way more likely to serve jail time for a misdemeanor. That's assuming this is their first conviction.

Processing felons is such an expensive proposition that most first-time non-violent offenders get probation. But they'll be saddled with such a stigma, probably won't be able to get a job, can't vote until they're off paper (or in some states, for the rest of their lives), may be kicked out of their residence, etc., etc., that the only thing they're likely to "learn" is (greater) contempt for authority. Someone convicted of misdemeanor theft is likely to serve a short time in the county lockup, usually with more suspended on condition they stay out of trouble ... more likely to be a learning experience IMO.



I don't think the OP was talking about "forgiveness" or letting anyone walk. Her hesitation has to do with a felony charge for a property crime, which is a sentiment I share (provided these people aren't career thieves).

[Crankin]

I generally like the idea of community service, but I don't think it should be the only thing used as a consequence in this case. And while I agree with Oak that things like killing someone on a bike with a car needs to be a felony, the sad truth is, in most of the juvenile cases I've dealt with, there are too many "chances" given, and then we are on a third or fourth offense, for which there have been very little meaningful consequences. And, we don't get the kids and their families the other help they may need.

[indysteel]

Much may depend on whether these kids are prosecuted as adults. Almost all states have "transfer" statutes whereby teens are tried as adults. It typically depends on the crime and the offender's age and past record. Some states allow for prosecutorial and/or judicial discretion, while others made it mandatory for cretain crimes. If they aren't tried as adults, then the state's juvenile justice procedure may provide additional privacy protection and fewer permanent ramifications. That's not to say there won't be serious consequences, but they'll be less severe than a felony conviction as an adult.

[Skippyak]

You all have a great deal of faith in the the idea that there will be any consequences? I doubt there will be any at all. You think they are going to be tried? And it be a felony? How many minor petty thefts even get to court?

[OakLeaf]

Pretty much all of them where the perps are caught (if by "get to court" you mean a complaint and a judicial resolution, not just cases where one party is obstinate enough to waste everyone's time on a trial).

Anyway, where this thread started is they're being charged with grand theft. You're right, there's not a lot of investigative resources put into petit thefts. But these perps have already been caught and, per the OP, charged.

Friend of mine did a couple of days for shoplifting a 59 cent cookie from 7-11.

[Raddogz]

Hopefully this kids have learned not to it again at the very least and there are consequences. It great you got the bikes back. Here in San Francisco, caught stealing a bike is a mis-demeanor assuming you get caught.

[kajero]

I TAKE BACK EVERYTHING I SAID. I hope those juvies get charged to the fullest. So much for me being understanding. It wasn't a random act for joy riding. It was deliberate and well thought out.

We claimed our recovered stolen bikes today. They were obviously not just picked up for joy riding.

The luggage rack on my SO's bike was removed. The rack is needed to hold the rechargeable battery. I hope we can replace it. If not, the bike is not useable for someone who needs assistance. We are talking about a $2500+ bike!

The Garmin mounts are also gone. Thanks goodness we keep the computer Garmin's inside.

The coil lock on the top tube I use to lock my bike up when on rides is gone . . . they would have needed a bolt cutter to remove that. That surely would take some thought. If I am going to lock my bike up out of my site, I am going to purchase a much better lock.

My seat bag is gone, my SO's front bag and seat bag are gone.

The end caps on the handle bars are missing.

My Ruby was filthy but I washed it. And my poor Ruby . . . There are lots of new DINGS and scratches.

I test rode the Ruby a little bit a go. The ride seems okay. But it is hard to ride the bike right now. I feel so violated knowing someone else had and abused her so much! I wonder if I will be able to let go of that awful feeling and enjoying riding my Ruby again.

[goldfinch]

The other half of it though, is that while a felony conviction will have way more long term consequences, they're also way more likely to serve jail time for a misdemeanor. That's assuming this is their first conviction.

Processing felons is such an expensive proposition that most first-time non-violent offenders get probation. But they'll be saddled with such a stigma, probably won't be able to get a job, can't vote until they're off paper (or in some states, for the rest of their lives), may be kicked out of their residence, etc., etc., that the only thing they're likely to "learn" is (greater) contempt for authority. Someone convicted of misdemeanor theft is likely to serve a short time in the county lockup, usually with more suspended on condition they stay out of trouble ... more likely to be a learning experience IMO.



I don't think the OP was talking about "forgiveness" or letting anyone walk. Her hesitation has to do with a felony charge for a property crime, which is a sentiment I share (provided these people aren't career thieves).

I so agree with this. We over punish felonies. People's lives end up ruined forever, with no way to rehabilitate themselves.

[kris7047th]

So they get off the hook with this and then move on up to stealing what? Cars? Make them pay now and do them a favor. They need to learn that if you play stupid games .. you win stupid prizes.

[Jolt]

So they get off the hook with this and then move on up to stealing what? Cars? Make them pay now and do them a favor. They need to learn that if you play stupid games .. you win stupid prizes.

I don't think anybody was suggesting they should get off the hook, it was more that some people were concerned about a felony conviction making it hard for these kids to (hopefully) become productive members of society after serving the punishment for their crime and learning their lesson.

[indysteel]

Again, I think it's worth stressing that unless these "kids" are treated as adults for prosecution purposes, they won't be convicted of a felony, or a misdemeanor for that matter. The treatment for juvenile offenders is different than it is for adults (or juveniles treated as adults). Typcially, terms like "felony" and "conviction" have no meaning within a state juvenile justice program. I don't know Minnesota's system specifically, but it seems to me that the outcome in this case may hinge more on whether the kids are transferred into adult court. Of course, there still be serious ramifications for a juvenile who commits the equivalent of a felony, but many of the concern expressed in this thread about the longlasting effect of convicting a teen with a felony conviction is the very reason that juveniles are treated differently in the first place.

[OakLeaf]

Are they juveniles? I don't think the OP said they were.

[Skippyak]

In the US "kid" as a term for a young person is totally overused. kid to me is a minor.

[indysteel]

Are they juveniles? I don't think the OP said they were.

That's what I took her to mean when she said "kid." But if she was using it more generically, then nevermind. I typically only use the word kid to refer to minors. Perhaps the OP can clarify.

ETA: The way she referred to them as "stupid kids," coupled with the suggestion that they likely didn't know the value of what they stole (because they are young, perhaps) led me to believe that we are, in fact, talking about minors. But again, perhaps she can clarify.