12 Yr Old Beats, Rapes Toddler

[Winston]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
The nature of the DP is such that it must take into account the state of mind of the victim at the time of the crime.

I'd say you got your terminology mixed up a little here.

[Mercator]

Originally posted by Sava
But it's not your toddler that was killed, so it's okay to be all bleeding heart and feel sorry for the killer.

And it's not your 12 year old kid.

[Boris Godunov]

Winston: Indeed!

[Verres]

Kill this sick 12 year old . Then find out why he did it , and kill the person who abused him ( assuming he was abused ) .

I've changed my position on issues like this of late....I know people say human reactions are based on emotions so someone personally involved (ie the victim's family) can't make an informed judgement; but if someone raped and murdered my kid, however old they were, I would tear them apart. **** the state, vigilante style justice is sometimes the answer.

[Boris Godunov]

Verres: The post you cited didn't appear to be advocating vigilantism that I can see. I gathered he meant killing the kid in an official capacity.

But your post lacks logical connection: what about this case makes vigilanteism the answer? Why would that be preferable over the state handling this case? Would you feel, were you accused of a crime, that vigilanteism would be acceptable?

If vigilanteism is unacceptable in some cases, it's unacceptable in all cases. If you make exceptions, then you're destroying the very notion that punishment for crimes is the domain of society.

What happens when the vigilante mob kills an innocent by mistake? Or kills someone accused of a not-so-heinous crime?

That just seems to be a pretty poorly thoughtout position.

[Verres]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
Verres: The post you cited didn't appear to be advocating vigilantism that I can see. I gathered he meant killing the kid in an official capacity.

I too gathered this, then went on to develop my own, slightly different view, rather than simply repeating what had already been said. The point about capital punishment was simply a starting point.

But your post lacks logical connection: what about this case makes vigilanteism the answer? Why would that be preferable over the state handling this case? Would you feel, were you accused of a crime, that vigilanteism would be acceptable?

The connection seemed logical enough to me. You may not agree with it, but I'd prefer it if you destroyed my arguments rather than attacking the way I expressed myself - I clearly do not spend enough time perfecting my debating skills to fit in here
I suspected that i would be accused of advocating vigilanteism if I said the family of the victim should be allowed to chose the killer's punishment, so I thought I would save you the trouble and say it myself.

That just seems to be a pretty poorly thoughtout position.

On the contrary, I've thought about it at some length. I am well aware that vigilanteism calls into question who is ultimately responsible for law and order etc, but I do not think that is necessarily a bad thing.

[Dr Strangelove]

This reminds me of a famous child murder case that occurred in Chicago twenty years ago. A 10 year old boy shoved an 18 month old child out of a window. The toddler died, the 10 year old was arraigned and released into the custody of his mother. Less than a week later "Yummy's" repeatedly stabbed body was found underneath a bridge. Is that what you had in mind?

While in this case the perpetrator may have been molested bear in mind that kids that age often engage in same sex experimentation regardless of their true orientation. Combine that with exposure to sex and violence, and even sexual violence via the media, then it's easy to see that even a kid who hadn't been sexually abused might perpetrate such a crime.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Verres
The connection seemed logical enough to me. You may not agree with it, but I'd prefer it if you destroyed my arguments rather than attacking the way I expressed myself

Um, I was addressing your arguments, not how you expressed yourself. The arguments were not logical.

I suspected that i would be accused of advocating vigilanteism if I said the family of the victim should be allowed to chose the killer's punishment, so I thought I would save you the trouble and say it myself.

That's not the same thing as vigilanteism, though. If the state were to convict the killer and then allow the family to choose the method of punishment, while I would strongly oppose such a thing, it wouldn't be vigilanteism.

On the contrary, I've thought about it at some length. I am well aware that vigilanteism calls into question who is ultimately responsible for law and order etc, but I do not think that is necessarily a bad thing.

Time devoted to thought doesn't connote it being well thought out.

Vigilanteism does far more than just "question" such a thing, though. It places the populace at the mercy of roving mobs who aren't accountable to anyone and may dispense "justice" as it sees fit. I don't see how anyone can say this is a good thing.

[Ben Kenobi]

Can you really believe that this shows he is irrevocably an evil person?? It's absurd to destroy someone's life because they had some sick, confused ideas as a kid.

12 years old is old enough to know what you are doing. You have to balance the rights of the person, with the need to protect society. Until we have a better idea as to why this 12 year old raped and killed his brother, then we shouldn't be letting him back into society.

Secondly, if the kid has some sick and confused ideas, then we are not doing him any good by releasing him. He needs to be in the care of others, not left to these same ideas again.

[Ben Kenobi]

and yes, I think that even a 12 yearold can be a irrevocably evil person

No different from any of us, in that regard.

[Ben Kenobi]

Personally, I think society's resources should be spent helping the weak, the poor, the unfortunate... rather than engaging in a foolish and futile attempt at rehabilitation.

But it's not your toddler that was killed, so it's okay to be all bleeding heart and feel sorry for the killer.

You call me a bleeding heart liberal?

How do you know rehabilitation is impossible? If it is true that this 12 year old has been abused, then he falls into your category of the unfortunate who ought to be helped by society, not abandoned.

Killing one child won't bring the other one back.

[Last Conformist]

@BK: I don't think anyone is saying the kid should be released. What people are arguing against are capital punishment and life sentences.

[Winston]

How about they release him, and if he does it again, then he's really in for some serious jailtime. Unless he can be rehabilitated or says he's terribly sorry about both murders.

Poster will not be held accountable for the above suggestion in any way

[asleepathewheel]

The 12 year old brain may or may not be capable of having the requisite mens rea for murder. Just because you think you remember what you were when you were 12 doesn't mean you can generalize that to everyone. Clearly statements like that indicate a lack of understanding and experience with children.

If I had more time I would post links to studies of the juvenile brain that show the lack of development in areas which are thought to control impulses. I have a slew of information and articles on the topic, but unfortunately they are at my office.

[Shi Huangdi]

The key is we can't be absolutely sure if he is reformable or not. Dangerousness is one of the most difficult things for psychologists to predict. But when it comes to people who have already taken a life, we don't take the risk that they won't harm someone again. It doesn't matter if the kid was "messed up" or had problems, unless a person is absolutely insane to the degree that they don't know what they did was wrong, society demands that whatever your problems are that in the least you won't kill someone as a result of it. We also benefit from taking a firm line in demanding life in prison for murder to deter any premeditated actions.

If it is found that this kid was insane, then he will be sent to a mental institution for a very long time. That doesn't sound like that is the case though, so it is probably most likely he will be getting life without parole.