That’s a Wrap on Decoded! POV: 30+ Students Take On the Justice System

What happened at Decoded

On Saturday, October 10, we hosted Decoded: A Youth, Brain, and Justice Event, our very first live event and part of Youth Justice Action Month 2026! More than 30 students from several countries joined us on Zoom, which honestly blew us away. A huge thank you to Angela, our San Francisco chapter president and one of our policy writers, for opening the session, and to Kat, our Texas chapter president, for walking everyone through ways to get involved at the end. We couldn’t have done it without you both!

The case

We used a real case that hasn’t been decided yet. In October 2024, a 15 year old in Fall City, Washington was accused of killing five members of his family. His 11 year old sister survived. He is charged with five counts of aggravated first degree murder and one count of attempted first degree murder, and prosecutors want the case moved to adult court [3]. The question we focused on was which court should hear the case. That is separate from whether he is guilty, and we were careful not to treat guilt as decided.

The three lenses

We started with the evidence. The defense says there was abuse in the home and points out that he had no prior record. Prosecutors dispute parts of that account. I asked whether the seriousness of the crime tells us everything we need to know, and one student had a great answer: it doesn’t tell us what made him act at that particular moment. Next we looked at the brain. The prefrontal cortex, which is involved in planning and impulse control, keeps developing into a person’s mid to late 20s. Another student jumped in to add that trauma can get in the way of that development and make impulse control worse, which was exactly where I was headed! We kept coming back to the point that understanding why someone did something is different from excusing it. Last was the law. In Roper v. Simmons (2005), the Supreme Court ruled that the death penalty can’t be used for crimes committed before age 18, partly because teenagers are less mature, more influenced by others, and more able to change [1]. Roper doesn’t decide who gets tried as an adult, though. In Washington, a judge makes that call at a decline hearing using the eight Kent factors from Kent v. United States (1966), which include how serious the offense was, the young person’s maturity, and whether they could be rehabilitated in the juvenile system [2].

Kahoot

Then it was game time! We played a five question Kahoot on what we had covered, including what neurolaw is and what Roper actually decided. The leaderboard kept changing the whole way through, and our top three players each got all five questions right. Congratulations to our champions, and thank you to everyone who played along!

Open discussion

For the “You Have the Floor” segment, we asked whether a traumatized 15 year old should be tried as an adult, and so many of you raised your hands! One student said that how serious a crime is and how mature the person is are separate questions, and that courts sometimes treat a terrible crime as proof of an adult mind. Another said that even if it isn’t his fault, releasing him could be a risk to the public. A third noted that prosecutors say he gave the 911 operator a false story, which could suggest he knew what he had done, and that would matter if the defense ever argued insanity. Angela then asked how anyone decides that a person committed to a psychiatric hospital is ready to leave. A student brought up Andrea Yates, who was found not guilty by reason of insanity in 2006 and is still in a psychiatric hospital, which was a really strong example that hadn’t even crossed my mind. When we went through the Kent factors, most people picked either maturity or public protection as the most important. One student chose public protection because the other factors all relate to whether the person can change. Thank you all for sharing your thinking so openly!

Our guests

We were so lucky to have two expert guests with us! Rajiv S. Khanna, Esq., who has practiced law for over 30 years, compared this to Battered Woman Syndrome. He explained that it isn’t a defense by itself and is instead psychological evidence used to support defenses like self defense or duress. He added that the argument for using developmental science is even stronger, since every teenager goes through adolescence, while a syndrome applies only to some people. Dr. Abha Rai, Assistant Professor of Social Work at Loyola University Chicago, also attended and told us she loved how the event was structured and organized, which meant so much to our team. Thank you both for giving your time to a group of students!

What’s next

As of this post, the judge in the Fall City case hasn’t ruled. We have a lot coming up! Our first Neurolaw Youth Summit is in December, and you can register or apply to present on our Events page. We’re also looking for Open Verdict submissions, editorial team members, writers for case analyses and science explainers, people to help with open letters to lawmakers, and social media help. Come follow us on Instagram at @mindontrial_ov! Thank you so much to everyone who came, and to Youth Justice Action Month for partnering with us. We’ll post clips from the recording soon, so stay tuned!

Sources

[1] Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (2005): https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/543/551/

[2] Kent v. United States, 383 U.S. 541 (1966): https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/383/541/

[3] MyNorthwest, Fall City decline hearing coverage: https://mynorthwest.com/?p=4276260