⚓ Welcome to Tidal Echoes

Series: “Youth Speaks Its Mind” (A republication of our hometown newspaper, The Suffolk County News, from 65 years ago)

Our history isn't just a timeline; it's a series of waves that shape who we are today. In this series, we revisit the bold voices of Sayville’s past. Today, we listen to Rosemary Westray as she questions the ethics of juvenile anonymity and accountability in 1962.

Originally published in The Suffolk County News on March 22nd, 1962. Transcribed for the Sayville Alumni Association.

Juvenile Anonymity and Accountability

By Rosemary Westray, Sayville High School

A few weeks ago a boy, 15, stole a car for a joyride. In the course of stealing the car he injured, although slightly, the woman to whom it belonged. In the newspaper account was the following phrase: "His name was withheld by the authorities because of his age". Therefore, the reputation of this boy, whoever he may be, has supposedly been kept untarnished.

Withholding a person's name because of his age does no earthly good so far as I can see. It may even encourage the offense because the youngster thinks, "My name won't be in the papers because I'm too young so why not take the car, or the money, or break into that house, or beat up that boy? My parents won't do anything to me." This withholding practice certainly does not seem to encourage the person to reform. In this particular case, it was the boy's second auto theft in four months. Is that an attempt to lead an honest, upright life?

In my opinion, if a person is old enough to commit a crime, he should be old enough to take the punishment and not be able to hide behind the immunity of a police statement withholding his name. If the person should be mentally ill (in which case he should be under a doctor's care) he should have the right of privacy, but if, however, he is just a thrillseeker, showoff, or so-called “big shot” he should be prepared to take the consequences. If he wishes to commit a man's crime, he should take a man's punishment.

True, his family faces the anguish of worrying “What will the neighbors say?” if his name is revealed, but is it not likely that these neighbors suspect or even know of the boy's activities already? Perhaps if more young offenders knew that they and their families would face public shame and dishonor there would not be so many of this type of offender. Or maybe both parties just do not care.

⚓ Cast Your Thoughts

How do these words from 1962 land today? Reflecting on Rosemary Westray's insights:

• rosemary argues that public shame is a necessary deterrent—do you remember the local "joyriding" incident she mentions, or others like it from your time in sayville?
• she mentions the family's worry of "what will the neighbors say?"—how strong was that sense of community reputation in sayville during the early 60s?
• the debate over "a man's crime, a man's punishment" for youth is still ongoing—how have your thoughts on juvenile justice evolved over the decades?