ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Tuesday, February 13, 1996 TAG: 9602130114
SECTION: VIRGINIA PAGE: C-1 EDITION: METRO
DATELINE: RICHMOND
SOURCE: ROBERT LITTLE AND DAVID M. POOLE STAFF WRITERS
The state Senate on Monday passed its version of a package of legislation aimed at reforming the juvenile justice system, widely hailed as one of the bipartisan triumphs of 1996.
It differed somewhat from a similar bill working its way through the House of Delegates, in that it requires all juveniles suspected of violent crimes to be tried as adults. The House version would place only murderers and other most-egregious offenders in adult court.
Not everyone liked the plan, which would take away some power of judges to make case-by-case decisions.
Sen. Yvonne Miller, D-Norfolk, is among the more ardent opponents. She said the state is trying too hard to put criminals in prison, and not hard enough to prevent crime.
"We cannot afford in Virginia to have a growth industry that's built on the pain and suffering of our children," she said.
Sen. John Edwards, D-Roanoke, tried in vain to change the proposal, which he said could deny some juveniles any chance at rehabilitation.
His proposal failed 25-15; then three additional amendments failed by voice vote. Edwards promised to try again, perhaps when the House of Delegates' version comes before the Senate.
He said the 15 votes in support of his plan was misleadingly low. Many legislators felt bound to the proposals in the bill because it was the result of extensive negotiations between lawmakers from both houses and both political parties, he said.
"A lot of people agree with me. They've told me so privately," Edwards said.
One senator involved in those negotiations, Sen. Jack Reasor, D-Bluefield, acknowledged as much.
"You give up some things to get some things," Reasor said. "But in that process, we came up with the best plan possible."
One of Edwards' primary beefs: that the bill would allow prosecutors to decide whether juveniles would be tried in adult court in some cases. Edwards, himself a former prosecutor, argued that only judges are disinterested enough to make such decisions.
"A prosecutor is an advocate, not an impartial jurist," said Edwards, who tried unsuccessfully last week to make the same changes at the committee level.
LENGTH: Medium: 51 lines KEYWORDS: GENERAL ASSEMBLY 1996by CNB