IMDb रेटिंग
7.1/10
2 हज़ार
आपकी रेटिंग
अपनी भाषा में प्लॉट जोड़ेंA judge's stance on juvenile crime in a small town gains praise, until suspicions arise about his motives. Scandal unfolds, lives are shattered and a secret comes to light, exposing corrupti... सभी पढ़ेंA judge's stance on juvenile crime in a small town gains praise, until suspicions arise about his motives. Scandal unfolds, lives are shattered and a secret comes to light, exposing corruption at the highest levels of the justice system.A judge's stance on juvenile crime in a small town gains praise, until suspicions arise about his motives. Scandal unfolds, lives are shattered and a secret comes to light, exposing corruption at the highest levels of the justice system.
Robert G. Schwartz
- Self - Executive Director, Juvenile Law Center
- (as Bob Schwartz)
Mark Arthur Ciavarella
- Self - Convicted Former Judge
- (as Mark Ciavarella)
Jim Avila
- Self - Television Journalist, ABC News
- (आर्काइव फ़ूटेज)
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
Greetings again from the darkness. Focusing on "the honorable" Judge Ciavarelli and Judge Conahan of Pennsylvania, director Robert May (The War Tapes) provides some insight into a despicable miscarriage of justice that the media labeled Kids for Cash. It's a catchy phrase that can be defined as a convergence of some less-than-favorable traits: abuse of power, over-the-top greed, and a collapse of trust in the juvenile justice system.
The talking head approach is on full display, and proves quite effective here. We get interviews and statements from attorneys, journalists, citizens, a particularly vocal radio talk show, and surprisingly, even Judge Ciavarelli and Judge Conahan. The biggest wallop comes from the words and body language of those most directly impacted – the kids and their parents.
For those unfamiliar with the story, Ciavarelli and Conahan were charged in various felonies related to their conspiratorial actions that led to the closing of a County facility, the fundraising for a new private facility, and the subsequent sentencing of thousands of kids to ensure the facility remained at capacity. The financial rewards for these two men included "finder's fees" ($2 million for Ciavarelli), or what most others would term bribes or kickbacks.
The actions of Judge Ciavarelli are defended by his staunch campaign strategy of "Zero Tolerance" in the wake of the Columbine tragedy. Once elected, his frequent speeches at local schools reinforced his commitment to zero tolerance, and his promise to severely penalize any kid that ran afoul of the law. In theory, most of this sounds like a formidable stance, however, the real problem occurs when the test of reasonableness is absent in the charging of teenagers with a crime. This is where the film falls a bit short. The kids going to court makes a dramatic story, but the missing link is HOW does this happen when most of these cases come across as schoolyard dust-ups, typical teenager antics (a MySpace page), and simply part of the maturing process for adolescents?
There is an acknowledgment that most young teenagers don't have the necessary decision-making skills or sense of judgment to handle these situations. The point is well made that teenagers are not just little adults there is much growth to come, both physically and intellectually. This leads to the real question: why aren't we doing a better job of allowing kids to develop their judgment and dispute resolution skills. The pizza shop guy in the movie says "we all got in playground fights". He's right! But these days, that gets the kid (even first time offenders) arrested and possibly sent away where they come back hardened and angry. This approach is not working - though, I'm certainly not suggesting mass playground fights. There has to be a better way.
With so much attention to the (then) upcoming trials of the two judges, the film's tone shifts to one of revenge and reckoning. It's an emotional and powerful time, and neither of the judges come across as believable or likable. In fact, Conahan strikes a plea bargain, and Ciavarelli defiantly states he is not guilty of "kids for cash" AFTER being found guilty of 12 felonies on related issues! His true character shines through.
The film expertly tells the story often very personal stories of some of those impacted by the Kids for Cash scandal. It raises many questions on numerous topics, though most are overshadowed by the focus on the judges' trials. Near the end, many statistics are displayed – some of which could support their own documentary. The real impact of a documentary is judged by its call to action – the ability to get people involved in finding answers and solutions. Let's hope the impact is profound, even if it's too late for some.
The talking head approach is on full display, and proves quite effective here. We get interviews and statements from attorneys, journalists, citizens, a particularly vocal radio talk show, and surprisingly, even Judge Ciavarelli and Judge Conahan. The biggest wallop comes from the words and body language of those most directly impacted – the kids and their parents.
For those unfamiliar with the story, Ciavarelli and Conahan were charged in various felonies related to their conspiratorial actions that led to the closing of a County facility, the fundraising for a new private facility, and the subsequent sentencing of thousands of kids to ensure the facility remained at capacity. The financial rewards for these two men included "finder's fees" ($2 million for Ciavarelli), or what most others would term bribes or kickbacks.
The actions of Judge Ciavarelli are defended by his staunch campaign strategy of "Zero Tolerance" in the wake of the Columbine tragedy. Once elected, his frequent speeches at local schools reinforced his commitment to zero tolerance, and his promise to severely penalize any kid that ran afoul of the law. In theory, most of this sounds like a formidable stance, however, the real problem occurs when the test of reasonableness is absent in the charging of teenagers with a crime. This is where the film falls a bit short. The kids going to court makes a dramatic story, but the missing link is HOW does this happen when most of these cases come across as schoolyard dust-ups, typical teenager antics (a MySpace page), and simply part of the maturing process for adolescents?
There is an acknowledgment that most young teenagers don't have the necessary decision-making skills or sense of judgment to handle these situations. The point is well made that teenagers are not just little adults there is much growth to come, both physically and intellectually. This leads to the real question: why aren't we doing a better job of allowing kids to develop their judgment and dispute resolution skills. The pizza shop guy in the movie says "we all got in playground fights". He's right! But these days, that gets the kid (even first time offenders) arrested and possibly sent away where they come back hardened and angry. This approach is not working - though, I'm certainly not suggesting mass playground fights. There has to be a better way.
With so much attention to the (then) upcoming trials of the two judges, the film's tone shifts to one of revenge and reckoning. It's an emotional and powerful time, and neither of the judges come across as believable or likable. In fact, Conahan strikes a plea bargain, and Ciavarelli defiantly states he is not guilty of "kids for cash" AFTER being found guilty of 12 felonies on related issues! His true character shines through.
The film expertly tells the story often very personal stories of some of those impacted by the Kids for Cash scandal. It raises many questions on numerous topics, though most are overshadowed by the focus on the judges' trials. Near the end, many statistics are displayed – some of which could support their own documentary. The real impact of a documentary is judged by its call to action – the ability to get people involved in finding answers and solutions. Let's hope the impact is profound, even if it's too late for some.
Kids for Cash is a neat documentary covering the unfolding of the "Kids for Cash" scandal in Luzern country, PA, where two judges sent more than two thousand children to a juvenile detention center while getting paybacks from the private operation of the same facility.
The filmmakers had personal access to both accused judges, who gave lengthy interviews on camera. However, the producers didn't let that fact cloud their views on the whole affair as it is common in such productions. Instead, we have several interviews with young victims of the scheme and their parents.
What is not so good about the movie are is the parallelism of the stories of victims they follow. The cut points on the narratives look hastily put together instead of carefully chosen to permeate the viewer to the individuality and commonality of each story.
At the end, viewers are left with the impression of two corrupt men who genuinely think they weren't doing anything wrong other than some minor procedural violations. Although not the main theme of the documentary, one is left to wonder how horrendously normalized it had become to just take "bad kids" away from school and send them to correctional facilities.
The filmmakers had personal access to both accused judges, who gave lengthy interviews on camera. However, the producers didn't let that fact cloud their views on the whole affair as it is common in such productions. Instead, we have several interviews with young victims of the scheme and their parents.
What is not so good about the movie are is the parallelism of the stories of victims they follow. The cut points on the narratives look hastily put together instead of carefully chosen to permeate the viewer to the individuality and commonality of each story.
At the end, viewers are left with the impression of two corrupt men who genuinely think they weren't doing anything wrong other than some minor procedural violations. Although not the main theme of the documentary, one is left to wonder how horrendously normalized it had become to just take "bad kids" away from school and send them to correctional facilities.
The documentary centers around the kick back money recieved by two judges, illegally, from a complex funding operation for building a juvenile prison. The juvenile court judge states he wanted to build a prison that was sanitary. So he utilized his own resources, from a beer company to a strip club, which he has business ties, and privately funds building the jail. The same jail he will be sentencing the juveniles to. But that's not even close to the real dilemma.
This all takes place post Columbine, so a ZERO tolerance is placed. Zero tolerance meaning they are going to weed out the trouble makers by any means necessary. Here are some examples of ZERO TOLERANCE:
A juvenile purchases a scooter for $250. The police finds out the scooter was originally stolen. He is sentenced to five years in prison.
A girl gets in a fight in school and is sentenced the same.
A juvenile gets in an argument with a parent at a bus stop. As the parent is cursing and shouting its the boy who gets sentenced to 4 years of prison.
All three of those kids sentenced without a lawyer. These are 15 year olds who will not experience growing up outside of prison walls.
The sentencing is beyond harsh. This is closer to paranoia. This is how you ruin a person's life, demoralize them and permanently damage their souls. The central focus is not the money. The documentary reveals trails of unjust sentencing and their ramifications show a complete lack of understanding of children. At 1 hr 18 min, there is an unforgettable scene when a parent confronts the judge about her sons suicide after his sentencing.
This documentary is powerful. It reveals a problem no one is talking about. If not for a group of advocates, the unjust sentencing will continue. The system will continue to silence these children as they are sentenced to grow up in the isolation of cold concrete walls of prisons.
This all takes place post Columbine, so a ZERO tolerance is placed. Zero tolerance meaning they are going to weed out the trouble makers by any means necessary. Here are some examples of ZERO TOLERANCE:
A juvenile purchases a scooter for $250. The police finds out the scooter was originally stolen. He is sentenced to five years in prison.
A girl gets in a fight in school and is sentenced the same.
A juvenile gets in an argument with a parent at a bus stop. As the parent is cursing and shouting its the boy who gets sentenced to 4 years of prison.
All three of those kids sentenced without a lawyer. These are 15 year olds who will not experience growing up outside of prison walls.
The sentencing is beyond harsh. This is closer to paranoia. This is how you ruin a person's life, demoralize them and permanently damage their souls. The central focus is not the money. The documentary reveals trails of unjust sentencing and their ramifications show a complete lack of understanding of children. At 1 hr 18 min, there is an unforgettable scene when a parent confronts the judge about her sons suicide after his sentencing.
This documentary is powerful. It reveals a problem no one is talking about. If not for a group of advocates, the unjust sentencing will continue. The system will continue to silence these children as they are sentenced to grow up in the isolation of cold concrete walls of prisons.
I concur with the Judge on this. Not guilty of cash for kids.
It appears from this documentary that there were no ongoing payments for keeping the facilities full. The Judge had a reputation of sending juveniles down (prior to the decision to close the original facility).
Guilty of bribery and corruption yes. Guilty of robbing the juveniles of their right to representation, but that was not on the charge sheet.
The judge does describe an incident in his youth where he said his father clobbered him for attempting to steal a car. Would you rather get punched in the mouth or be sent to lock-up? That is what I would like to ask that creep.
The problem lies with the system. Two million children arrested each year; 95% are for non violent crimes. This reflects the adult prison population in the USA which has the highest rate of incarceration in the world and more prisoners than the rest of the world combined.
Many of these prisons are privately owned slave plantations. The justice system is corrupted by prison for profit.
The parole system ensures a rapid recycling of ex cons back into the system and more profits for prison owners (like Bill Gates)
The USA is a corrupted violent society. It's collapse is imminent.
The facts at the end of the documentary are a sad indictment of the US and it's propensity to violence
It appears from this documentary that there were no ongoing payments for keeping the facilities full. The Judge had a reputation of sending juveniles down (prior to the decision to close the original facility).
Guilty of bribery and corruption yes. Guilty of robbing the juveniles of their right to representation, but that was not on the charge sheet.
The judge does describe an incident in his youth where he said his father clobbered him for attempting to steal a car. Would you rather get punched in the mouth or be sent to lock-up? That is what I would like to ask that creep.
The problem lies with the system. Two million children arrested each year; 95% are for non violent crimes. This reflects the adult prison population in the USA which has the highest rate of incarceration in the world and more prisoners than the rest of the world combined.
Many of these prisons are privately owned slave plantations. The justice system is corrupted by prison for profit.
The parole system ensures a rapid recycling of ex cons back into the system and more profits for prison owners (like Bill Gates)
The USA is a corrupted violent society. It's collapse is imminent.
The facts at the end of the documentary are a sad indictment of the US and it's propensity to violence
Kids for Cash is a documentary that shows the horrific miss sentencing of several young American kids as a ploy for the judges receiving cash in hand by sending these kids to private detention centres. Throughout the documentary you can't help but feel for these kids who have had upwards of seven years of their life thrown away due to greed and selfishness of the authority figures. Though the documentary travels on both sides of the fence (between the judges fault and not the judges fault) the bulk of the film views the head judge as this overly conservative man who has only his own interests in hand.
One great documentary and never gets boring. Though the documentary will polarise views of the situation, anyone who is interested in this case will be glad they had watched this gem.
One great documentary and never gets boring. Though the documentary will polarise views of the situation, anyone who is interested in this case will be glad they had watched this gem.
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिविया"The US incarcerates nearly 5 times more children than any other nation in the world."
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
- How long is Kids for Cash?Alexa द्वारा संचालित
विवरण
बॉक्स ऑफ़िस
- US और कनाडा में सकल
- $1,43,178
- US और कनाडा में पहले सप्ताह में कुल कमाई
- $36,639
- 9 फ़र॰ 2014
- दुनिया भर में सकल
- $1,43,178
- चलने की अवधि1 घंटा 42 मिनट
- रंग
- ध्वनि मिश्रण
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें