Polish Police and Their Tactics

@jon357, I'm not trying to "make an argument' - it's just the article says one thing and you - another and that link you gave doesn't explain everything.


So what does that mean? Can a minor in the UK be given a life sentence, for example, or not?

"That" link? The link to the official government site? It explains the situation well.

Since on the one hand under English law, a guilty verdict of murder must result in some sort of life sentence and on the other hand, nobody wants to imprison an under-18 for life, we have a very good workaround, one that has been used for many years. Remember that England and Scotland use a system based oil Common Law rather than an inferior system based on 'codices'.

If a minor is convicted of murder, they call the mandatory sentence "Detention during His Majesty's Pleasure" and the tariff (minimum time to be served before release) differs from that of an adult, as are the terms of release and a few other conditions. This may interest you, since you seem interested:

sentencingcouncil.org.uk/sentencing-and-the-council/types-of-sentence/types-of-sentences-for-young-people/

So no, children are never tried as adults.

You seem very interested in English/Welsh sentencing policy.

You should be happy :))) Thanks for the link and the info, I'll study it when I have more time.

I'm of course always delighted when good people living in countries with poorer-quality legal systems (i.e. pretty well anywhere outside the Anglosphere) take an interest in how it's done properly.

@jon357, I wouldn't say that having the age of criminal responsibility at 10 is something "done properly". That's a very young age. In my opinion - too young. In Poland it's at 13.

It works well, allows flexibility and most importantly allows intervention by social services when a 10 year old is in danger of being negatively influenced by older kids.

The UN and experts seem to disagree with you:

theguardian.com/society/2019/nov/04/age-of-criminal-responsibility-must-be-raised-say-experts

"Representatives from youth services, the justice system and politicians are urging the government to raise the minimum age a child can be convicted of a crime by at least two years from 10 to 12, in response to the Guardian's investigation into youth courts."

"The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has urged reform across the UK after the UN's committee on the rights of the child (UNCRC) decided the global minimum age at which a child can be prosecuted should be 14."

I totally disagree with that. There have been murders carried out by children younger than that, with full knowledge of what they're doing. Certainly there are assaults and violent crimes perpetrated by under 14s. They need to be held accountable.

With me or with the law?


Indeed. Are you familiar with the Edlington case? It's a depressing read, especially as the public enquiry afterward detailed the behavioural escalation to the main crime and the opportunities that were lost. If the age were 13 or 14, it is highly likely that lives would have been lost.


I'd say that although accountability plays its part, the key is the possibility of early intervention by the authorities, and that on a statutory basis since those under 14s most likely to be at risk of further offending are likely to be in the least cooperative family/social environment.

What the minimum age should be then, according to you?


Both.

They're welcome to. The law will change as and when legislators deem it right.

There have been calls to lower the age; not because anyone wants to lock up under 10 (that wouldn't happen) but because addressing extreme behaviour in some of the most vulnerable kids may give them better outcomes as they grow older. That and maintain the quality of life in the communities where they live, a point not unrelated to the first.

Setting the age of criminal responsibility higher doesn't exclude addressing extreme behaviour and applying other measures by the court. In Poland it's called "środki wychowawcze".

And here's a more detailed look at the law in Poland:

infor.pl/prawo/dziecko-i-prawo/nieletni-i-prawo/89528,Kiedy-nieletni-odpowiadaja-za-przestepstwa.html

We do it a little differently. Below 10 it needs to be care orders which are used sparingly.

I quite like our system, however the key in any system is flexibility. Youth justice and youth welfare has to be shielded from the failings of bureaucracy. The courts aren't perfect but are better.

Absolutely.


Is that the two brothers, ten and eleven years old, in the UK who abducted the other boys and tortured them, one to within an inch of his life?


I don't think there should be any minimum age for violent crime. If a child is old enough to commit a crime or abet in the commission of crime, that needs to go through the criminal justice system - but obviously in an appropriate manner for very young children who clearly need psychological or other intervention. For trial in an actual court I think nine or ten is perfectly acceptable.

Yes. I went to school myself in that place and hated every minute. I read the report of the public enquiry into the case and was saddened by all the missed opportunities to intervene. If the older boy had received earlier intervention the crime may not have happened.

It was similar when I lived there except if anything it's worsening there now.

Yes, that was a disgrace. The judge did take into account those circumstances and the fact that their unfortunate home circumstances had made them what they were, but he was right in his sentencing. They should be detained at HM's pleasure.

So you're in favour of what it's like in the US? o_O


I disagree with this "old enough". I don't think young kids have "the full knowledge" of what they're doing and understanding of the gravity of their actions and of consequences. The stage of their development should be taken into account. Especially that their actions usually stem from what's going on at their home. And at that age there's probably a bigger chance of them getting "fixed" than in case of adults. That's why in my opinion young kids shouldn't be getting criminal record for the rest of their lives. It's not fair, imho.

I think the US and UK approach goes against the knowledge about children's psychological and cognitive development and that's why I disagree with it. There's a reason why there's an age limit in most countries in the world and why in many of them it's higher.

Disgusting arrogance.

What's more, it's not like the English invented a totally parallel system to the Romano-Germanic codices.

Your system emerged in the decades after the Normans took over. So thank the French.

Before the Normans, most English law worked like historic Russian law, on a folk basis in the various hundreds and shires. Given that you had earlier experience of Roman law, my conjecture would be that this is something the Vikings gave you.

But correct.


Far older. Some elements are pre-Roman. Your system derives however from France.

Yes...

There's a reason even a Russian company, registered in Cyprus, engaging in relations with a company from Georgia, still wants their contracts governed by English law.

And this makes the City lawyers oh so rich...

Indeed. Some of them anyway.

They have to know their stuff rather than just look it up in a book.

@jon357

I had the pleasure of working on two cases which appeared before the High Court in London. I'm not a lawyer, so my involvement was limited to me producing several white papers as part of my internship at a firm in NY.

It was most impressive to observe English judges and barristers in action.

Some of the most intelligent people I had ever listened to.

Well, I trained as a Montessori teacher (ages 3-12 years) so I understand the stages of development and I worked with children in the inner city of Dublin for almost 20 years, many of whom came from dodgy family backgrounds so I'm speaking from that perspective.

Having known/taught hundreds of children, there were many who were vulnerable to being lead astray into petty crime and obviously one wouldn't want to see them get a criminal record. However if their misdemeanours went through the courts, as Jon said, their behaviour would be taken more seriously and addressed more efficiently than leaving it in the hands of social services alone.

There are two types of children that are really a worry. One is the kids who are borderline special needs, with well below average IQ and can end up going along with stuff because they want to have a friend, or be obedient to their parents (yes, parents use young kids to help with crimes). They get exploited all the time, but again they need proper intervention.

However, there is another group of children who, even at the age of five, have something very sinister going on. I suppose they are the sociopaths. I came across at least three and when you look into their eyes, even when they're under the age of six, you can see that something is not right in there.

One example is a five year old boy who put bleach in a teacher's tea when her back was turned. He had previously thrown a hamster across the room 'to see if it would burst'. When asked why he put bleach in the tea, he gave a very interesting answer. 'Because it has no colour so she wouldn't know it was there'. Now, he gave from a 'good' family. Nice parents, professional people, well educated etc. but in denial about his behaviour. At that age he had full knowledge and deliberate intent to harm. If that boy, at the age of ten, goes on to stab someone in the back 'for fun', what then?

What did the school do with this kid?

I know that you were a teacher, but if I'm to be honest - it doesn't matter to me. Even if someone is a good teacher with years of experience, that doesn't make that person a good judge or an expert in child psychology. Also, I know what teachers can be like. They can have their issues and flaws too. Some of them shouldn't be teachers at all. Some are even sociopaths themselves. I had such a teacher at primary school. Only quite some years after I finished that school parents finally intervened and that teacher got fired. So she taught there for years even though already during my time she shouldn't have been let anywhere near children of any age, let alone such young kids.

That's why for me just the fact of being a teacher doesn't make anyone automatically an oracle. Teachers can be wrong too, including about issues concerning kids.

I think we should be first and foremost interested in the opinion of people working with those minors who broke the law - they know the system better than any of us, they know what works and what doesn't, what could be improved - they're the practitioners. And so if people working in the youth services and the justice system in the UK are urging the government to raise the minimum age a child can be convicted of a crime by at least two years from 10 to 12, then I'm guessing they have good reasons for that. They surely know about this more than random people on the internet.


I know what you're talking about (although the kids I came across weren't as young as in your case).

Btw, according to dr. Scott Bonn, criminologist, psychopaths are born "that way", while sociopaths have been socialized into it.


Well, you know, a family that may seem to be "good" to a teacher or the outside world in general may not be so "good" in private at home.

I once watched a very interesting documentary on TV about a research into what causes people to be psychopathic killers conducted by neuroscientist Jim Fallon. Here's an article about this research:

psychologytoday.com/us/blog/you-me-psychology/202011/are-serial-killers-born-or-made

For the purpose of this research he analysed scans of brains of different people, including convicted killers. He discovered that the brains of killers differ from the brains of other people.

For another project he conducted PET brain scans of ten members of his own family and himself. To his surprise it turned out that he has "the worst serial killer brain". What's more, his DNA test has shown that he had markers that were really high risk for violence. As he says:

"Now, it became a bit more serious, because I had both the brain pattern and the genetics that were very consistent with a really bad news killer, a psychopath really"

Many murders occurred in the history of his family, so probably that's where those "bad" genes came from.

In that TV documentary he said that when he told his family about his results they said they weren't terribly surprised, because there was something different about him. His son even told him that he was sometimes scared of him. However, that was it - he's a law-abiding, accomplished citizen, he didn't kill, rob, rape, etc. anyone.

So, if he was born a perfect potential psychopathic murderer or a serial killer - why didn't he end up being one? He thinks it's due to his upbringing. His mother gave birth to him after four miscarriages and so he was a very wanted, loved and cherished child.

Judging by this research - it isn't enough to have "bad" brain and "bad" genes - there has to be something in the child's environment to "trigger" that psychopathic killer potential.


How about reacting before a child like this actually stabs someone in the back? It looks like all the signs were there already. Did you or other teachers addressed this somehow (considering the parents were in denial)?

With respect, your experience of teachers is in the Polish education system and Ireland is totally different, both the training and the school ethos. Apart from that Montessori training is heavily psychology based as Dr Montessori was a paediatrician and psychologist and her system was derived solely from observing children's behaviours, not from theory.


That' why I put 'good' in quotes. In Ireland teachers have a lot of contact with parents and because of our social structure and small population size teachers may well have taught the parents of some pupils. You can always sense when there's something going on under the surface. You see it in the children. Notice how the boys in particular talk to their mothers, what the tone is, the language used and even if you've never met the father, you've met him, if you know what I mean. Maybe not always, but sometimes you can actually hear the father talking when the seven year old opens his mouth.


Absolutely. Irish primary schools (kids start when they're four) have a whole system in place for dealing with these issues.

Good point, Atch. Pestolazzi included!

Maybe so, but I'm not talking about educational systems, etc. but about people. Teachers are people too with their flaws and all - even in Ireland. And I have some "experience" with you. You could be great at teaching kids stuff, but I've noticed some things about you that make me think you wouldn't make a good judge, that's all...


Yes, I know what the Montessori method is.


Yes, I totally agree.

Btw, what about the parents of that boy?


That's great. So how was it dealt with in case of that "bleach and bursting hamster" boy? (I'm honestly curious). And did it work??

Nearly every education system with which I'm familiar
will naturally reflect those cultural, not to mention religious,
values with which their pupils will be imbued.

@Lyzko, as I already wrote - I wasn't talking about education systems or even cultural and religious values of a particular nation. I was talking about an individual teacher.