Skip to main content
Help Center Community Shop

12 YEAR OLD CHARGED WITH FIRST DEGREE MURDER.

Comments

16 comments

  • jethro
    That is a tough question and one I hope to never be faced with personally. My kids at 8,10,and 10 know what death is, but some of their friends seem to have no idea.

    I would not want to be sitting on that jury.

    Mike


    edited to correct spelling....
    0
  • dan kelly
    i just finished hearing about this on the news here...which ever way you look at it, it is sad...
    0
  • Tailgunner1954
    Well we could charge the "Apoligests" that don't believe that anyone is responsable for their own actions instead, but they would use the excuse that they arn't responsable either.
    0
  • slipgate
    It depends on the 12 year old - in most cases, any 12 year old that would do this, would also do it at 16, or 18, or 21, etc. So I think this kid should be tried as an adult and fried.
    0
  • David Nunn
    This is a hard thing to grasp, but this is what I think. If it were my 12-year-old, and my toddler, the powers that be had better keep that 12-year-old out of my reach for the remainder of my lifetime.
    0
  • Permanently deleted user
    Bad seed, might as well nip it in the bud.
    0
  • bhale187
    It breaks my heart to hear of an innocent child's violent death.

    A 12 year od would have to be far behind his peers intellectually if he did not understand what a baseball bat would do to a toddler, or understand that death is permenant.
    0
  • River Rat
    He understood brutality, harm, pain, and even death. Should he be punished the same as an adult? Perhaps not. Is he accountable for his actions? Absolutely.

    He's old enough to hunt in some states. In some states, he could legally drive (limited) in a couple of years. He knew what he was doing.
    0
  • Permanently deleted user
    Where should the line be drawn for age of responsibility,, 8 year olds have killed, 5 year olds have killed. 59 year olds have killed and have the mind of a 5 year old,, Just where do we draw the line? Should we apply a "eye for an eye" no matter what the age of the person? I dont know.. Do you?
    0
  • mateomasfeo
    quote:Originally posted by Classic095
    Where should the line be drawn for age of responsibility,, 8 year olds have killed, 5 year olds have killed. 59 year olds have killed and have the mind of a 5 year old,, Just where do we draw the line? Should we apply a "eye for an eye" no matter what the age of the person? I dont know.. Do you?


    That's the rub.

    For instance, if someone 18 or over were to have "consensual" sex with this boy, they would be up for statutory rape under the theory that someone at his age is not mentally capable of giving consent. Yet that same 12 year old could be tried as an adult for murder because he should know better, or had evil intent.

    I have never heard a good theory of a fix with regard to children and mens rea...
    0
  • spryor
    Well, it sounds as if they were siblings and the mother left him there
    to babysit the other two. I beleve SHE should hold some aaccountability
    here, since she deemed him responsible enough to do this job.
    0
  • Dakota308
    one really obvious question


    why on earth is a 12yr old the baby sitter of two younger children.


    WHERE ARE THE PARENTS WHO WERE ABSENT OF THAT ARTICLE WTH???
    0
  • Queen of Swords
    quote:Originally posted by Dakota308
    one really obvious question


    why on earth is a 12yr old the baby sitter of two younger children.


    WHERE ARE THE PARENTS WHO WERE ABSENT OF THAT ARTICLE WTH???


    Depends on the kid. Some 12 year olds are quite capable of this responsibility. That's like your average 7th grader. Generally, plenty mature enough. Obviously this one was not.

    Sorry to say, I have to believe that at 12 years old, he was perfectly capable of understanding that inflicting blunt-force trauma to the head of a toddler with a baseball bat would cause injury. Just an angry, angry kid.

    Sad story all around.
    0
  • tr fox
    I have always noticed something very odd regarding people who kill other people and then claim that they should be excused from punishment (severe anyway) either because they were not sane, in their right mind or were too young to understand. What is strange about these people is that for some reason, even though they claim they were not able to fully comprehend what horrible thing they were doing to that victim, those murderers ALWAYS SEEM TO be very capable about keeping themselves safe and from harm. Before, during and after their heinous, violent crimes.

    So, my question is, if those murderers are able to be intelling and rational about their own welfare and safety, why can they claim they were not fit to understand what a horrible experience they were visiting on their victims? It seems like a double standard they are using soley for the purpose of getting off.
    0
  • Permanently deleted user
    TR: I hardly think many 12 year olds know much about self preservation or even think about it after committing a horrible deed. Most oft these deeds are on the spur of the moment for kids, they do the act, then go on .

    This kid probably hit the baby with the bat and then went on to watching his TV program. Would he do it again, probably, Who Knows.
    0
  • 1911a1-fan
    commit murder you die period, i don't care mentally retarded, alzheimers, insane, young or old, and as far this lame excuse "they did not know what they where doing" fine, then they won't know their dieing ether
    0

Please sign in to leave a comment.

Recent Activity