Wow, 12 year old kills playmate and gets 26 years.

[Ecthy]

I don't think it's quite fair to condemn the kid because of a single slip-up.

[Lorizael]

Oh I agree. This kid is seriously disturbed. There is something very wrong with him. But you have to wonder how a child can be come so violent, so remorseless, and so... well... evil... in only twelve years.

[Imran Siddiqui]

And the kid STILL sticks to his story that the other kid fell out of the tree. He shows no remorse, and smiled when leaving. I mean, really, MAYBE prison will scare him into realizing that violence is wrong, but how do you ever change a monster like this one?

[Lorizael]

As Sloww pointed out, it was thirty four slip ups.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Re: Re: Wow, 12 year old kills playmate and gets 26 years.

Originally posted by Tim_Augustus
[q=CNN]

A boy convicted as an adult of stabbing a playmate to death when he was 12 years old was sentenced Monday to the maximum 26 years in prison.

[/q]

A 12yo offender tried as an adult??

What if he was 10? 8? 6?

At what age do you give little sociopaths a free pass for premeditated murder?

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
And the kid STILL sticks to his story that the other kid fell out of the tree. He shows no remorse, and smiled when leaving. I mean, really, MAYBE prison will scare him into realizing that violence is wrong, but how do you ever change a monster like this one?

With about 20 grams of potassium.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Lorizael
My problem with this is the future. He's fifteen now. He'll be in prison for twenty six years. In 2032 out pops a forty one year old man who has known only one constant his whole life - violence.

He knows violence put him in jail, he knows violence probably kept him alive while locked up, he knows violence was committed against him for what he did.

He will have no life skills, as he was put into prison in the middle of his education, and he will have no concept of the world as it will be then, because so much time will have been spent on the inside.

I can't conceive of a way in which he will ever be a productive member of society. If you're going to steal twenty six years of life away from a boy, I don't see the point in keeping him alive at all. Might as well kill him to save time and money.

How many years of life did he steal away from his victim? Or is a '**** not worthy, since he won't be a "productive" member of society? This little asswipe had a choice, and made a choice.

Or.

An attempt can be made to make sure that he can, at some point in the future, redeem himself and find a way to be a man in this society.

What's the better option?

An "attempt." At "curing" sociopathy? The little **** would simply have the opportunity to game the shrink system, figure out what answers sound good to manipulate his way towards freedom, and then what - you get an adult sociopath with a prior history of killing and confidence that he can game the judicial and mental health systems.

[Lorizael]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
How many years of life did he steal away from his victim? Or is a '**** not worthy, since he won't be a "productive" member of society? This little asswipe had a choice, and made a choice.

Not to seem callous or uncaring, but I honestly don't give a **** about the little '****. He's dead. He's not coming back. You have to work with what you've got. The murderer is still alive. This sucks ass. So wouldn't it better if, instead of letting a murderer live, we turn the murderer into a nice and happy person who does good things for other people?

An "attempt." At "curing" sociopathy? The little **** would simply have the opportunity to game the shrink system, figure out what answers sound good to manipulate his way towards freedom, and then what - you get an adult sociopath with a prior history of killing and confidence that he can game the judicial and mental health systems.

That.

Is your opinion. You absolutely positively cannot guarantee that the little **** is going to grow up to be a manipulative sociopath whose only desire in life is to cheat the system so that he can kill again. You don't know this person, you don't know what sort of life he's lived, you don't know why he did what he did.

But your viewpoint is based on something. Cynicism. And it's not misplaced cynicism, because as Arrian already pointed at, really good criminal rehabilitation systems just don't exist.

So how about, instead of rejoicing over the fact that a twelve - now fifteen - year old is about to lose any chance he has of ever leading a productive life, we figure out how we can make good rehabilitation systems?

[Asher]

Originally posted by Lorizael
My problem with this is the future. He's fifteen now. He'll be in prison for twenty six years. In 2032 out pops a forty one year old man who has known only one constant his whole life - violence.

In Canada he can be classified as a "dangerous offender" and be held in prison indefinitely.

[Jaguar]

Originally posted by snoopy369
What worries me more, is the other child. 14 years for 'complicity'... that sort of thing is exactly what the lack of childhood maturity/responsibility is defined by. Unless he ORGANIZED the attack, which would take away the 1st degree charge from this kid, I don't see how a kid can be tried as an adult for quite possibly being pressured into something... THAT's the stupidity here IMO.

QFT. You're like 11 and people expect you to stop a maniac with a knife or you go to prison for decades? Are you ****ing kidding me?

[The Mad Monk]

Originally posted by Ecthy
Tell me, how does locking him up for twice as long as he was old when he did it benefit either him or the rest of society?

It gives the other people he would have killed another 26 years to live.

[The Mad Monk]

Is your opinion. You absolutely positively cannot guarantee that the little **** is going to grow up to be a manipulative sociopath whose only desire in life is to cheat the system so that he can kill again.

But the cost of being wrong, and thereby letting him do it again, makes "absolutely positively cannot guarantee" too high a requirement.

The fact that he has already done so is enough.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Lorizael


Not to seem callous or uncaring, but I honestly don't give a **** about the little '****. He's dead. He's not coming back. You have to work with what you've got. The murderer is still alive. This sucks ass. So wouldn't it better if, instead of letting a murderer live, we turn the murderer into a nice and happy person who does good things for other people

Well then, since the little '**** doesn't matter, why get bent out of shape by a little thing like murdering someone who doesn't matter? Why "punish" the poor little misunderstood boy at all, and let him have another chance to be "productive?"

That.

Is your opinion. You absolutely positively cannot guarantee that the little **** is going to grow up to be a manipulative sociopath whose only desire in life is to cheat the system so that he can kill again. You don't know this person, you don't know what sort of life he's lived, you don't know why he did what he did.

You can't guarantee anything. Chuck Manson might be a real standup guy and a great BBQ host nowadays. Would you want him as your neighbor, though?

"What sort of life he lived" may explain some background for his personality disorder, but it neither excuses it, nor does it provide much basis for treatment. This isn't a new case, and the behaviors demonstrated (meaningless "thrill" killing), failure to stop during the repeated stabbings despite any indication of rage or lack of control, lack of remorse, lack of empathy, sticking to a patently ridiculous story totally contradicted by forensic evidence, all point to sociopathy. That's not "my opinion," that's DSM-IV and mainstream psychology.

But your viewpoint is based on something. Cynicism. And it's not misplaced cynicism, because as Arrian already pointed at, really good criminal rehabilitation systems just don't exist.

I'm a cynical bastard, yes. But my viewpoint is based on the simple fact that sociopathic killers have not been shown to be successfully treatable.

So how about, instead of rejoicing over the fact that a twelve - now fifteen - year old is about to lose any chance he has of ever leading a productive life, we figure out how we can make good rehabilitation systems?

The murder victim here "lost" any chance of leading a productive life. The little **** in question through it away voluntarily. **** him. Effective rehabilitation is needed, but for those who have a high probability of benefitting from it, and who are low enough risk offenders that warrant the opportunity to reenter society.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Jaguar

QFT. You're like 11 and people expect you to stop a maniac with a knife or you go to prison for decades? Are you ****ing kidding me?

There is no legal obligation to intervene in any event, let along against an armed attacker.

There is, however, a legal obligation (and not too tough to figure out, in the context of general rules of society) to do things like: Not help set up the scenario, not to lead the victim into an ambush, not to lie repeatedly and inconsistently about what happened.

It also doesn't help to keep a journal (prior to the killing) and write that Muhammad and Malvo are your "idols" because "the sniper killed 13 people and they couldn’t find out who it was."

[SlowwHand]

Personally the term "little '****" strikes me as both uncaring and repugnant.