Now, facts are few and far between right now, so it’s hard to say all that much with certainty, but if the allegations are valid, doesn’t that mean that these kids are guilty of first degree murder? I mean, they chose to go back to the site three times and beat the man again and again. Does this not speak to premeditation?
Also, if we have a boy whose concept of civic virtue is that it’s acceptable to kill a human being when you’re bored, do we really want him back out on the street any time soon? Will giving him a slap on the wrist and a short time in juvie really protect people from him?
This is a tough one for me. On one hand, they’re still children. Their brains have not finished forming. Do we condemn someone for life because of an act they committed when they were a kid? Are they “done” at age 14, completely unredemable to society? Or, is there a chance that they could be salvaged by intensive therapy and become productive citizens? One life has already been lost-- it seems a shame to lose more when there may be a chance (albeit slim) at redemption.
On the other hand, they have done something incredibly serious and must pay the consequences. However, I don’t think “lock 'em up and throw away the key” will do anyone much good.
Nor do I think a harsh punishment will deter others thinking of doing the same thing-- after all, I’m sure these kids have a TV and are aware of the punishments for murder.
There’s presumably a good reason why an age limit is set for those who cannot be considered adult. That means making all decisions based on these principles, not picking or choosing which should fit and which should not.
As I see it, someone who would, in cold blood, beat a man to death is pretty much ‘done’. It seems to me that someone without enough of a moral compass to resist murdering someone for fun isn’t really going to be reached by any ammount of therapy. I think it’s probably in society’s best interests for this person to not get out of jail until he’s in his early sixties.
And yet, from time to time, minors are charged as adults.
I don’t think so.
I doubt any non-sociopathic teens are waiting on tenterhooks to see if they can’t get some thrill-kills in with a pentalty of only a few years in jail.
Where did this meme come from that 14 year olds are incapable of moral choice? I used to be a 14 year old, and while I did some stupid, reckless things, I was quite capable of feeling sympathy for other human beings. I would never have beat up some helpless person, and neither would even the most out of control of my friends. We’d fight each other maybe. We’d drive recklessly, do stupid vandalism, ignore “no tresspassing” signs, and embarrassing teenage crap like that. But nothing like the crime in the OP’s link.
This kid is a sociopath. If he gets out he will kill again. Life without parole is the appropriate sentence for such a horrific crime.
Larry, I think you hit on the prime point of importance for me.
Kids do stupid things. Kids do reckless things, sometimes so stupid that other people get hurt or killed. But this kid beat a man to death, and had to go back to the scene three times in order to complete the deed. That’s way too much time for it to be an ‘accident’.
And yes, I agree, this kid is a sociopath. I do not believe that society can be safe with him on the loose. Who knows, maybe next time he’ll act alone and make sure that there are no witnesses.
They’ll probably say that the 14-yo was under the spell of the older one. But this is an utterly heinous crime, and a 14-yo is sufficiently aware to know that killing people is wrong. If he’s found guilty, then a sentence of life, probably without parole for at least 20 years, seems fitting.
I thought the same thing Quartz. The kid’s defense lawyer would be a fool if they didn’t make the claim that the older kid somehow threatened or forced or coerced the younger into this act. Hopefully, the DA’s office will send someone along to deal with that sort of obfuscation.
The article contains no information about the 14-year-old’s history. It’s possible he might not be a psychopath, sociopath or on his way to a APD diagnosis. I’m sure this will all be considered ad naseum in the trial.
I’ve been pondering how much the capacity for rehab should play in sentencing. People who commit crimes much later than 14 have been known to make drastic changes in their lives, but how much should this matter when compared to their original crime?