The “Innocence Penalty”: Is it More Pronounced for Juveniles?

Despite the presumption of innocence, we know that individuals accused of crimes are punished for maintaining their innocence in ways both tangible and intangible as they make their way through our criminal justice system. For example, even if instructed not to, jurors may infer guilt from a defendant’s failure to testify; defendants who exercise their right to go to trial receive lengthier sentences if convicted than those who plead guilty; and, once convicted, defendants who maintain their innocence are often denied opportunities for parole or clemency. This article explores whether these “innocence penalties” are even greater for children who are accused of crimes and comes to the preliminary view that the answer is yes. The main focus of the juvenile system is on redemption and rehabilitation, concepts that assume guilt. This article seeks to promote conversation about this important topic and create more room for the consideration of innocence in the juvenile system

Boats : Wait for HK 1997

PRS

The “Innocence Penalty”: Is it More Pronounced for Juveniles?

Despite the presumption of innocence, we know that individuals accused of crimes are punished for maintaining their innocence in ways both tangible and intangible as they make their way through our criminal justice system. For example, even if instructed not to, jurors may infer guilt from a defendant’s failure to testify; defendants who exercise their right to go to trial receive lengthier sentences if convicted than those who plead guilty; and, once convicted, defendants who maintain their innocence are often denied opportunities for parole or clemency. This article explores whether these “innocence penalties” are even greater for children who are accused of crimes and comes to the preliminary view that the answer is yes. The main focus of the juvenile system is on redemption and rehabilitation, concepts that assume guilt. This article seeks to promote conversation about this important topic and create more room for the consideration of innocence in the juvenile system

AI-Enabled, Ultrasound-Guided Handheld Robotic Device for Femoral Vascular Access

Hemorrhage is a leading cause of trauma death, particularly in prehospital environments when evacuation is delayed. Obtaining central vascular access to a deep artery or vein is important for administration of emergency drugs and analgesics, and rapid replacement of blood volume, as well as invasive sensing and emerging life-saving interventions. However, central access is normally performed by highly experienced critical care physicians in a hospital setting. We developed a handheld AI-enabled interventional device, AI-GUIDE (Artificial Intelligence Guided Ultrasound Interventional Device), capable of directing users with no ultrasound or interventional expertise to catheterize a deep blood vessel, with an initial focus on the femoral vein. AI-GUIDE integrates with widely available commercial portable ultrasound systems and guides a user in ultrasound probe localization, venous puncture-point localization, and needle insertion. The system performs vascular puncture robotically and incorporates a preloaded guidewire to facilitate the Seldinger technique of catheter insertion. Results from tissue-mimicking phantom and porcine studies under normotensive and hypotensive conditions provide evidence of the technique’s robustness, with key performance metrics in a live porcine model including: a mean time to acquire femoral vein insertion point of 53 ± 36 s (5 users with varying experience, in 20 trials), a total time to insert catheter of 80 ± 30 s (1 user, in 6 trials), and a mean number of 1.1 (normotensive, 39 trials) and 1.3 (hypotensive, 55 trials) needle insertion attempts (1 user). These performance metrics in a porcine model are consistent with those for experienced medical providers performing central vascular access on humans in a hospital