NEW CASTLE —
There are only two possibilities in the case of Jordan Brown.
He is either responsible for the February 2009 shooting death of Kenzie Houk or he is not.
If he is not responsible, that means the government has kept the boy in custody for three years — from the time he was 11 until his current age of 14. It is difficult to define the injustice of such a circumstance.
But if he is determined to be responsible for Houk’s death — as well as that of her unborn son, Jordan’s half-brother — that doesn’t exactly rectify the state’s situation.
When a juvenile is found to have committed an offense, and therefore defined as delinquent, the state’s goal is rehabilitation. In Jordan’s case, he undoubtedly would receive counseling, psychoanalysis and other care designed to determine how an 11-year-old could pick up a shotgun and fire it into the head of his father’s fiancée while she lay in bed.
And then catch the bus to go off to school.
The purpose of this treatment is to help a troubled youngster deal with his demons, with the intent of making sure he has the capacity to become a productive and law-abiding adult when he is released to society.
In the three years Jordan has been held, he has received no such treatment. He has been housed, educated and restricted in his movements.
But not rehabilitated, because in the eyes of the law, he remains innocent. So what’s to rehabilitate?
I am aware that Pennsylvania’s legal system, like all human creations, is imperfect. Yet in the matter of Jordan Brown, it is downright dysfunctional.
Regardless of whether you think the boy is innocent or guilty, regardless of whether you think an 11-year-old should be charged as an adult, I challenge you to look over the history of this case and conclude: “Yes, that’s a reasonable process.”
It took two and a half years of legal wrangling for Pennsylvania’s judicial system to determine Jordan should be handled as a juvenile. Then, when it was decided this highly publicized case should be handled behind closed doors, the New Castle News and two other newspapers objected.
Last week, the Pennsylvania Superior Court decided against the papers and in favor of secret sessions. After all this time in the spotlight, it was suddenly essential to protect Jordan’s privacy.
That’s because he was 11 when he was accused of committing a double homicide. Had he been 12, the doors of the courtroom likely would be open. Why? Because the law says so; no other explanation is necessary.
The News decided not to appeal, mainly because the move might add two more years of legal limbo to this sorry saga.
I always have been of the belief that common sense ought to play at least some role in determining the law. And perhaps I’m being naive, but I would like to think our commonwealth’s legislators and judges possess at least a smidgen of this cognitive quality.
So why do we have a process in Pennsylvania where an 11-year-old is charged as an adult in a serious crime, with years then spent trying to decide whether that status should stick? Meanwhile, the issue of guilt or innocence is put on the back burner.
Undoubtedly, our leaders in Harrisburg and in the courtrooms know that the case of an 11-year-old charged with homicide will receive intense publicity — far more than a 30-year-old accused of the same offense. So how did a legal system that supposedly cares about Jordan’s privacy allow the last three years to take place?
For the families of Jordan Brown and Kenzie Houk, this has been a painful period that’s far from over. For Pennsylvania’s legal system, it’s been a shameful period. Closing the courtroom doors won’t make that go away.
Mitchel Olszak
Related Photos
-
Mitchel Olszak, Dear Reader
Discussion
Mitchel Olszak: State guilty of dysfunction in Jordan Brown case
- Mitchel Olszak
-
-
Mitchel Olszak: Excuses for data sweep sound hollow
Perhaps 2013 will go down as the year privacy and civil liberties became too inconvenient for government. Listening to assorted officials defend massive programs that scoop up vast amounts of data certainly gives that impression.
-
Mitchel Olszak: Casino satire comes to fruition
Several years ago, I wrote a satirical column about government subsidizing casinos. In it, I envisioned a time in the future when casinos became so prevalent that the gambling market was glutted with them.
-
Mitchel Olszak: The challenge in life is to make certain that we live it
Many years ago, I worked as a reporter covering the police beat. The job involved a paper in a small town. And while much of this news consisted of burglaries, fights, drunk driving arrests, etc., I would get the occasional call for a fatality.
-
Mitchel Olszak: State records reveal water problems with gas well drilling
The drilling of shale gas in Lawrence County and the rest of Pennsylvania holds great promise. It also holds the potential for harm. Depending on who you ask, health and environmental concerns about shale gas drilling are either very real or very overblown.
-
Mitchel Olszak: Snooping threat to the free press
In “All the President’s Men,” reporter Bob Woodward conducts late-night meetings with a source in a parking garage. That source, Deep Throat (later revealed to be high-ranking FBI official Mark Felt), was worried that he would be exposed as a tipster in the Watergate scandal.
-
Mitchel Olszak: Toomey takes a chance on guns
How does a conservative Republican senator representing a state with a Democratic majority protect himself politically? One way is to take positions that tend to straddle the nation’s ideological fence.
-
Mitchel Olszak: Terrorists strive to create fear
The finish line of a road race serves as the division between one world and another. Ahead of the finish line, there is structure and discipline, with attention paid to the runners as they cross over. Spectators are kept back, mainly to avoid interfering with the participants — and perhaps to keep them from being trampled.
-
Mitchel Olszak: Kelly, allies battle arms treaty
Supporters of the right to bear arms have a champion in Congressman Mike Kelly. The federal lawmaker, whose district includes most of Lawrence County, has been making waves with his criticism of the Obama administration and its support for the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty.
-
Mitchel Olszak: I like beer, so I’m watching our state closely
I like beer. More to the point, I like good beer. In my younger days, just about any swill would do. But with the passage of time, sophistication and exposure to the possibilities, my interests in beer have sharpened and matured.
-
Mitchel Olszak: Political lessons from distant past hold value today
If you want to gain an appreciation for great thinkers, read some of history’s major political philosophies. Here you will find the works of Plato, Machiavelli, Locke, Hobbes, Rousseau, St. Augustine and many others. They explored difficult social issues and offered serious insight.
- More Mitchel Olszak Headlines
-
