Jordan Brown is a 12 year-old boy who is giving Pennsylvania courts a reason to scratch their heads. Last month a Pennsylvania judge ruled that Brown would stand trial as an adult on multiple counts of first degree murder.

Brown shot his father’s eight-and-a-half month pregnant fiancé in the back of the head with a child model 20-gauge shotgun. Should the court system be allowed to try this child as an adult?

If Brown is convicted as an adult, he will be the youngest person in United States history to be sentenced to life in prison.

If Brown is sentenced in a juvenile court, he can only be held in detention until he is 21.

Should he be allowed to get off with a maximum nine-year sentence?

It seems like a very harsh punishment, but you have to remember that he shot a woman in the back of the head while she was sleeping, killing both her and her unborn baby.

Given the right circumstances, children should be tried as adults. A person’s age should not give him or her a get-out-of-jail-free card. If a child knew what he or she was doing was wrong, he or she should have to face the maximum sentence.

If a child planned out a series of actions that would bring harm to another human being, they should have to face the maximum punishment.

Nine-year-old Cameron Kocher, another child from Pennsylvania was tried as an adult for the murder of his 7 year-old neighbor.

In this case the judge said there was nothing for the juvenile justice system to offer. Kocher showed a lack of remorse by often falling asleep in pre-trial meetings.

In the same vein, Brown threw the bullet casings away and went to school as if nothing had happened.

Some would say this also shows a lack of remorse.

This is one of the contributing factors that led to the judge’s decision to try Brown as an adult and it is completely fair for them to do so.

Children have the capacity within themselves to commit a crime knowing full well what they are doing.

Just because children can stand trial as an adult does not necessarily mean he or she will get the maximum sentence. They have access to the same type of defenses an adult would have.

The diminished capacity defense and the insanity defense are among these common defenses. A child can also plead guilty in order to get a lesser sentence.

Our legal system was built on the idea of free will. I believe that as children we possess the free will that gives us the ability to make choices.

A child has the choice to either kill or not to kill. If a child chooses to kill, he or she should be forced to face the maximum sentence, but this does not preclude the right to a fair trial.

They, like all others, can use any of the defenses their attorneys can think of. They, like all others, can plead guilty and receive a diminished sentence, but they, like all others, should still have to at least face the appropriate sentence.

We must not show preferential treatment to any individual; it would only create cracks in our legal system.

As Supreme Court Chief Justice Earl Warren said, “It is the spirit and not the form of law that keeps justice alive.”