« "The Eighth Amendment's Milieu: Penal Reform in the Late Eighteenth Century" | Main | South Carolina Supreme Court rejects constitutional challenge to juve sex offender's mandatory lifetime registration/monitoring »

May 3, 2017

PBS Frontline covers the impact of Miller via "Second Chance Kids"

Pbs-frontline-merged-logoAs detailed via this posting, the PBS series Frontline premiered a new documentary last night titled Second Chance Kids. Here is a kind of preview from the posting:

What happens when prisoners convicted of murder as teenagers are given the chance to re-enter society? In the wake of Miller v. Alabama — the 2012 Supreme Court ruling that found mandatory life sentences without the chance of parole for juveniles unconstitutional — some 2,000 offenders across the country are hoping to find out.

With unique access, the new FRONTLINE documentary, Second Chance Kids, follows the cases of two of the first juvenile lifers in the country to seek parole following the landmark ruling — including Anthony Rolon of Massachusetts.

At age 17, Rolon stabbed 20-year-old Bobby Botelho to death. He was given life without parole during the country’s crackdown on so-called juvenile “superpredators” — teenagers who were labeled violent, dangerous and incapable of change. The theory, which was popularized by academics and embraced by Democrats and Republicans alike, resulted in disproportionately extreme sentencing of black and Latino youths.

As the documentary explores, the “superpredator” theory has now largely been discredited and disavowed. And a series of Supreme Court rulings, relying heavily on developmental science, has said that the personal circumstances of teenage offenders must be taken into account when they’re sentenced. The court has also ruled that many of them should have the chance to prove they’ve changed.

In the above excerpt from Second Chance Kids, go inside the parole hearing that will decide Rolon’s fate. Watch as Rolon and his legal team plead for his release after 18 years, and as Botelho’s family argues against it.

As juvenile offenders across the country await their potential re-sentencing, the documentary asks tough questions about crime and punishment in America, and what happens when some offenders are given a second chance.

The PSB website allows one to watch the documentary in full, and it also has these two companion articles:

"They Were Sentenced as “Superpredators.” Who Were They Really?"

"How Brain Science Is Changing How Long Teens Spend in Prison"

May 3, 2017 at 04:47 PM | Permalink


All Second Chance Kids are to be released to the adjoining homes of the Frontline producers and of officials at PBS. Frontline is a left wing hate speech propaganda outlet. It uses the methodology of, and has the credibility of the David Duke website. Duke is honest about his bias, and hatred of Jews and of blacks. Frontline pretends to be objective journalism.

In the tradition of claiming the opposite of reality, developmental science shows adolescents to be superior to adults in every way, including their lower rates of violent crime. The lawyer is the stupidest group in our nation. The Supreme Court is the stupidest lawyers. The Supreme Court is the mortal enemy of all crime victims. It is a waking nightmare for crime victims.

Posted by: David Behar | May 3, 2017 7:42:01 PM

Doug, it is obvious that Supremacy Claus has rejected your request that he become more tactful and restrained in his posts. "The Supreme Court is the mortal enemy of all crime victims." His comments add absolutely nothing to your blog and has begun to deter thoughtful commentors.

I would encourage you to pull the plug on him.


Posted by: bruce cunningham | May 3, 2017 10:22:19 PM

Bruce. Please, cite an instance when the Supreme Court supported a substantive right of crime victims, not those degrading attestations? The most substantive is the one to not be victimized.

What you call "nothing" is the news from planet earth, from reality. I am sorry facts are bothering you.

Posted by: David Behar | May 3, 2017 11:03:30 PM

Doug, S.C. has proven my point. Now all four comments on a serious post are of no value to anyone.


Posted by: bruce cunningham | May 3, 2017 11:06:07 PM

Bruce. Try to stay on topic of Second Chance Kids. But, if you cannot, if you are getting emotional, explain how a request for a legal citation proves your point. You are an expert. You have access to legal research databases. Find a Supreme Court decision that supports the substantive crime victim right to not be victimized.

And, do not start citing decisions by OW Holmes. Cite a pro-victim decision from the last 50 years. That time is when the Supreme Court set out on its jihad against the crime victim, especially the black crime victim.

Then, Bruce, I demand that you provide your home address. All Second Chance Kids should be placed in the homes surrounding yours. You and the Supreme Court subscribe to the theory that people can change. Put the safety of your family on the line, and not the safety of minority families with less political clout. Can a comment get any more relevant to the subject of the post as that demand?

I will give you time. If you ever find a decision, it will be like this blog, 1000 utterances pro-criminal to 1 pro-victim.

Posted by: David Behar | May 4, 2017 12:25:54 AM

"Why did you kill by drowning that 3 year old child when you were 6?"

"He should not have touched my toy."

"Got it."

Then there is this case from England.


Anyone want those persons loosed on the public, must provide a home address. We are bringing him to your family's doorsteps.

And, Bruce, I am trying to make a policy point. You want to just discuss citations useful for your worthless government make work. You should be replaced by an email account between prosecutor and defendant. I am still waiting for a single recent Supreme Court decision supporting a substantive crime victim right, especially the one to not be victimized. For example, prosecutors and their agents, the police, have duties to the city, not to individual people. That precludes legal recourse when their carelessness results in a highly foreseeable injury, such as being murdered by an angry, paranoid husband. Can you explain how a duty can exist to a made up idea such as city, and not to a real person? That real person presented a signed judge's order to the police, for them to enforce. Their negligence was per se.

Posted by: David Behar | May 4, 2017 7:20:51 AM

The count of comments which are not useful to anyone on the blog has now reached seven.


Posted by: bruce cunningham | May 4, 2017 8:31:38 AM

Does the Second Chance Kids program accept child serial killers?

Posted by: David Behar | May 4, 2017 7:33:53 PM

Bruce. While you are counting useless Comments, can you tell the class if you ever socialize with prosecutors? Do you people raise a glass and toast to the stupidity of the tax payer, allowing the games you people play?

Posted by: David Behar | May 4, 2017 7:35:59 PM

Post a comment

In the body of your email, please indicate if you are a professor, student, prosecutor, defense attorney, etc. so I can gain a sense of who is reading my blog. Thank you, DAB