Content Warning: This section contains references to violence, sexual assault, and racism.

“The time I was on death row I was a kid, man. I wasn’t even able to vote for the politicians who opposed the death penalty. I wasn’t able to join the military. I wasn’t old enough to buy liquor. How do you sentence somebody that young to death? […] I ain’t seen the moon or stars in ten years. I ain’t felt grass on my feet in ten years. Women talk about a biological clock, right? I feel like I have a biological clock. I want a family. I want kids.”

Roy’s words underscore an essential contradiction of Trying Juveniles as Adults. Since the brains of teenagers are not yet fully developed, especially in the areas of planning, prioritizing, and impulse control, the federal government enforces a minimum age for military service (17), voting (18), and the use of alcohol (21). Until 2005, however, this common-sense approach was not extended to those convicted of capital murder.

“There was plenty of evidence that they took part in the planning of the crime and stole Kevin’s car stereo. But Kevin M., Demetrus S., and Richie J. were promised complete immunity as long as they were not the ones who pulled the trigger. They fingered Roy for the murder of Kevin Gardner, and in return they spent not one day in jail.”

The author touches on a trend that recurs throughout her book: When the police investigate more than one person for a particular crime, they often pressure the first suspect who gives a statement to shift culpability to the others. This frequently works to that person’s advantage, providing them with a light sentence or even total immunity. Besides prioritizing expediency over justice, this disadvantages younger people, who often have limited experience with the justice system and don’t know how to take advantage of it as their older accomplices do. In the case of Roy, Nanon, and Napoleon, their very innocence might have contributed to their convictions for capital murder.