11-year-old American is youngest person in world to face life without parole

jackiebaron

Ghandee wrote: »

The little shiite killed a pregnant woman, AND a nearly full term unborn baby ffs! No matter how you look at it, he murdered two people in cold blood!

Fcuk em!

I've absolutely zero sympathy for him, let him rot wherever it is he's headed for!

Is this punishment or revenge that you are seeking?

suicide_circus

How come he is charged with two counts of murder? He only killed one person, who happened to be carrying a full term foetus. Seems the unborn are only counted as people when it suits?

HavingCrack

sunflower27 wrote: »

fair enough dudass that you don't think kids these days are more grown up and mature than say 20, 30 years ago but I believe they are. I remember as a kid what was on TV and I look at the stuff that is out there now and am truly shocked. Then of course there is the internet/video games full of violence. i have friends with kids 9,10 years of age and I am really shocked at some of the things they 'know' about. By all mans dismiss it as 'tosh' - that's your perogative - but I am speaking from my personal experience..

This is what my point is. I'm giving you examples of how children have always been exposed to gross levels of violence throughout history. It isn't something new, despite what people think.

sunflower27 wrote: »

Yes kids fought in wars hundreds of years ago etc. I certainly didn't, I had limited access to violence, murder and stuff like that. But I knew right from wrong. That is the point i and others were making (correct me anyone if I am wrong) - that in these current times there is no way that kid didn't know the finality of his cowardly actions.

Your personal experience is irrelevant to my point though. You may not have fought in a war or seen mass executions or rape etc. but lots of children have and continue to do so, look at the Yugoslav wars for example or indeed Northern Ireland.

I'm certainly not arguing that there's a different between right and wrong, or that the child had no idea the woman would die when he shot her, just pointing out that society has always been violent and children have always been exposed to it.

HavingCrack

suicide_circus wrote: »

How come he is charged with two counts of murder? He only killed one person, who happened to be carrying a full term foetus. Seems the unborn are only counted as people when it suits?

While, I do not want to bring this thread off topic, it certainly is an interesting double standard of sorts.

sunflower27

Well, i stand by my personal experience as being relevant to the point i was making that, while i was not exposed to all the stuff kids of today are, I still knew as a kid that guns kill.

This kid told someone what he wanted to do according to the link. he went hunting with his dad, he knew exactly what would happen when he did what he did and he didnt just snap.

The reason these stories are so shocking is because they are - thankfully - so rare.

This isnt some little innocent dude that got a bit put out his dad had a girlfriend. This kid used the means he had at hand to blow her and her little baby to bits.

Try him for the despicable crime he did in full knowledge that the outcome was death and was permanent. He was 100% aware of what that outcome would be.

Helix

crayolastereo wrote: »

I don't think thats fair. He was 11. At eleven you don't understand life and death

what kinda dumb ass 11 year olds do you know?

ScissorPaperRock

sunflower27 wrote: »

Well, i stand by my personal experience as being relevant to the point i was making that, while i was not exposed to all the stuff kids of today are, I still knew as a kid that guns kill.

This kid told someone what he wanted to do according to the link. he went hunting with his dad, he knew exactly what would happen when he did what he did and he didnt just snap.

The reason these stories are so shocking is because they are - thankfully - so rare.

This isnt some little innocent dude that got a bit put out his dad had a girlfriend. This kid used the means he had at hand to blow her and her little baby to bits.

Try him for the despicable crime he did in full knowledge that the outcome was death and was permanent. He was 100% aware of what that outcome would be.

It doesn't matter what we believe he was aware of. The problem is the environment that led to him making that decision. Kids don't have much control over the environment that they are subject to, and therefore shouldn't bear full responsibility for the actions that it leads them to take.

Simple cause and effect.

Helix

ScissorPaperRoc wrote: »

It doesn't matter what we believe he was aware of. The problem is the environment that led to him making that decision. Kids don't have much control over the environment that they are subject to, and therefore shouldn't bear full responsibility for the actions that it leads them to take.

Simple cause and effect.

replace "kids" with "the vast majority of people" to illustrate how stupid that post is

Orando Broom

crayolastereo wrote: »

I don't think thats fair. He was 11. At eleven you don't understand life and death. This woman and her baby were replacing him in the eyes of his father. He deserves to be punished, he doesn't deserve to be locked away the rest of his life.

What will that little prick be like at 21, to have the mind of a killer at 11. Jesus. Life in prison is perfect for him.

HavingCrack

sunflower27 wrote: »

Well, i stand by my personal experience as being relevant to the point i was making that, while i was not exposed to all the stuff kids of today are, I still knew as a kid that guns kill.

This kid told someone what he wanted to do according to the link. he went hunting with his dad, he knew exactly what would happen when he did what he did and he didnt just snap.

The reason these stories are so shocking is because they are - thankfully - so rare.

This isnt some little innocent dude that got a bit put out his dad had a girlfriend. This kid used the means he had at hand to blow her and her little baby to bits.

Try him for the despicable crime he did in full knowledge that the outcome was death and was permanent. He was 100% aware of what that outcome would be.

Fair enough :pac:

I agree with you about the rest of your post, he deserves to be on trial,as a juvenile however, not an adult, for reasons I gave in a previous post. You won't find any disagreement from me on that.

ScissorPaperRoc wrote: »

It doesn't matter what we believe he was aware of. The problem is the environment that led to him making that decision. Kids don't have much control over the environment that they are subject to, and therefore shouldn't bear full responsibility for the actions that it leads them to take.

Simple cause and effect.

I do disagree with this. Children people do not have much control over the environment they subject to. While it is undoubtably wrong in my eyes that 11 year old children are taught how to shoot guns nobody forced this child to plan in advance, wait until the woman was asleep, take a gun and shoot her in her bed. His environment did not force him to do this, simple as. I believe an 11 year old knows the difference between right and wrong and this child clearly knew the woman would die when he shot her.

As I said however, he should be tried as a juvenile and not an adult.

ScissorPaperRock

Helix wrote: »

replace "kids" with "the vast majority of people" to illustrate how stupid that post is

All people are products of their environment, shaped by the events that occur and affect them throughout their lives. This is particularly true at a young age when the brain is still developing.

As far as replacing it with "the vast majority of people", I don't believe it makes the statement any less valid.

Crime, like poverty, is just a symptom of a society that fails to equitably, and adequately, meet the needs of all its members. Problems such as these are just manifestations of the failings and inequities intrinsic to the societies in which we live.

What's unfortunate is that we punish people rather than rehabilitate. Rather than address the conditions that shape people in this way, we blame people like this kid, and lock them away. It doesn't change anything, and the root cause is not addressed.

People don't just do things like this without a reason. Cause and effect.

HavingCrack

Orando Broom wrote: »

What will that little prick be like at 21, to have the mind of a killer at 11. Jesus. Life in prison is perfect for him.

This post is a bit ridiculous in fairness, the child may be an incurably violent sociopath or he may not and this may be the only violent murder he ever commits. However none of us are qualified medical doctors who have investigated him and making such assumptions in either direction based on some news reports is pointless.

Tar.Aldarion

First time I held a loaded gun was about 7/8 and even then I very well knew the consequences, let alone at 11. Can't really agree with the no chance for parole...At such a young age especially, the sentence should be more about rehabilitation.

midlandsmissus

What's teh evidence for this?

Just read that his Dad thinks he is innocent.

Orando Broom

HavingCrack wrote: »

This post is a bit ridiculous in fairness, the child may be an incurably violent sociopath or he may not and this may be the only violent murder he ever commits. However none of us are qualified medical doctors who have investigated him and making such assumptions in either direction based on some news reports is pointless.

Premeditated homicide? Are you for real or just on the wum?! There is simply no cure for him. To have the mens rea to do what he did at 11!! Jesus what will he be like as an adult. That little antichrist should never see the light of day.

HavingCrack

Orando Broom wrote: »

Premeditated homicide? Are you for real or just on the wum?! There is simply no cure for him. To have the mens rea to do what he did at 11!! Jesus what will he be like as an adult. That little antichrist should never see the light of day.

What does on the wum mean ? :pac: never heard it before :P

But this is my point, neither you or me know there is no cure for him. I#m not saying he isn't a sociopath but neither am I saying that he is. I'm not a doctor. You could argue that he is incurable on what you know, but I'll take the opinion of a doctor over that of people on the intrawebs. Does every person who commits homicide (at any age) automatically do it again? I'm sure there's definately a pattern and probably a significantly increased risk (the 1st murder is the hardest to commit is something I've heard before) but I doubt every single murderer always kills again.

In fact, presuming he is in fact guilty (he has not been convicted of any crime yet), I agree with you that in his current state he definately is a major risk to other people. However there may be methods of rehabilitating him, very unlikely to occur in the US but it may be possible.

Anywway my main point is, we don't know is he in fact a sociopath or not, will he re offend or not if he was released, can he be 'cured' or not or even did he commit the crime. That's why I'm holding back on saying anything until I hear the verdict.

smk89

suicide_circus wrote: »

How come he is charged with two counts of murder? He only killed one person, who happened to be carrying a full term foetus. Seems the unborn are only counted as people when it suits?

Good point it was the same with the Omagh bomb where 2 unborn were killed. But if a child dies before its 1st birthday legally it doesn't count as a death

Jeboa Safari

Deserves it, anyone that can shoot and kill a pregnant woman will never be normal. No amount of rehabilitation nonsense will cure a little **** like him, 11 is well old enough to know the difference between right and wrong, he doesn't deserve to be part of society.

orourkeda

serves the little bollocks right

Fight_Night

Jeboa Safari wrote: »

Deserves it, anyone that can shoot and kill a pregnant woman will never be normal. No amount of rehabilitation nonsense will cure a little **** like him, 11 is well old enough to know the difference between right and wrong, he doesn't deserve to be part of society.

:rolleyes:

Who are you to say he is not able to be rehabilitated?

davyjose

crayolastereo wrote: »

I don't think thats fair. He was 11. At eleven you don't understand life and death. This woman and her baby were replacing him in the eyes of his father. He deserves to be punished, he doesn't deserve to be locked away the rest of his life.

Plenty of other 11 year olds seem to.

Tar.Aldarion

midlandsmissus wrote: »

What's teh evidence for this?

Just read that his Dad thinks he is innocent.

I imagine they didn't convict on a whim and we can't know the details but it sounds like it was a clear cut case if the judge was enraged that he even tried to deny it.

Fluorescence

crayolastereo wrote: »

I don't think thats fair. He was 11. At eleven you don't understand life and death. This woman and her baby were replacing him in the eyes of his father. He deserves to be punished, he doesn't deserve to be locked away the rest of his life.

Bull. At 11 you know full well what life and death mean. He knew damn well what the fcuk he was doing, and I'm pretty sure blowing out the brains of a woman and her unborn baby was a pretty graphic sight. Perhaps he should have been given possibility of parole, but he deserves his sentence IMO.

Jeboa Safari

Fight_Night wrote: »

:rolleyes:

Who are you to say he is not able to be rehabilitated?

Yeah you're right, let someone capable of that sit through a few classes, let him back into society protecting his identity instead of the law-abiding majority, and take a chance and hope he doesn't decide to kill again, and sure if he does its societies fault anyway :rolleyes:

wolfpawnat

Fight_Night wrote: »

:rolleyes:

Who are you to say he is not able to be rehabilitated?

Are you qualified to say he can?

Could Ted Bundy, Eric Harris, Ian Huntley be rehabilitated? I, as a law abiding citizen, would not want to find out!

That could have been your sister!

A tiny child did not get to experience life because it's half brother was a disgusting animal! I hate and despise my stepmother. I don't take it out on my half brother and I would have never shot them and I was the same age as that animal when she was pregnant with my brother!

wonderfulname

wolfpawnat wrote: »

Are you qualified to say he can?

Could Ted Bundy, Eric Harris, Ian Huntley be rehabilitated? I, as a law abiding citizen, would not want to find out!

That could have been your sister!

A tiny child did not get to experience life because it's half brother was a disgusting animal! I hate and despise my stepmother. I don't take it out on my half brother and I would have never shot them and I was the same age as that animal when she was pregnant with my brother!

Are you qualified to say he can't? He shouldn't be denied parole, twenty years from now someone who is qualified should be allowed to make a judgement as to whether or not he is suitable to integrate into society. That decision should not be made now.

You don't exactly make a rational argument.

tfitzgerald

I am for long sentences but an 11 year old to life is a bit harsh they should give him a break

wolfpawnat

wonderfulname wrote: »

Are you qualified to say he can't? He shouldn't be denied parole, twenty years from now someone who is qualified should be allowed to make a judgement as to whether or not he is suitable to integrate into society. That decision should not be made now.

You don't exactly make a rational argument.

It is not a normal human pattern to think to kill a pregnant woman.

I do not think he should not be allowed ever even bother applying for parole, but not for at least he is okayed by professionals and a few of them at that! We as uneducated people in this area cannot decide what is right, we can only voice our opinions.

My argument is rational. Many people have situations like this occurring everyday in their families. Parents breaking up, new partners, half siblings. But not many would think of going and finding a gun or other deadly weapon and kill another human being. That is not normal!

Helix

ScissorPaperRoc wrote: »

As far as replacing it with "the vast majority of people", I don't believe it makes the statement any less valid.

it does if youre condoning not locking killers up for life with no parole, ever, because theyre only products of their environments

ScissorPaperRock

Helix wrote: »

it does if youre condoning not locking killers up for life with no parole, ever, because theyre only products of their environments

It shouldn't be about locking people up. It should be about addressing the conditions within the environment that made them like that, and about rehabilitating those who have been conditioned in such a way that makes them feel such actions are necessary.

Locking people up is a cop out. So far as we are unable to ensure that we can effectively rehabilitate people, they should be kept away from people, so that they cannot harm others, but in environments that can positively influence these people. Societies' attitudes need to change towards recognising and addressing the causes of these problems, and treating those that require treatment rather than punishing them.