Life Sentences for Minors

[Seifer]

Just read this article about minors who were given life without parole. Two boys in particular (who have been in prison for roughly 10 years each) now have lawyers who are trying to get their sentences lessened by the Supreme Court. According to them, it's unfair to give a minor life without parole, because "they're still not mature and deserve a second chance."

Sorry, but some of those minor's murdered people in such cold blood, I don't see why they deserve a second chance. Minor or not, if you beat the shit out of someone and then light them on fire, you've taken it past the point of retribution. I don't care if you're 14 or 40, you should know that there are consequences for murdering someone. Now, if the crime wasn't egregious or cruel, I can see giving a minor a chance for parole. However, I don't think that exception applies to the criminals in the above linked article.

[crashhelmet]

there was a time when 13 years old was considered an adult. Boys and girls were married and started families. Boys were sent off to war, worked full time as apprentices to various smiths, and were for all intents and purposes treated as an adult. Somewhere along the line, we decided to continue babying them all.

If a minor is tried as an adult, they deserved to be sentenced as an adult. Parents aren't allowed to discipline their kids anymore. If we take it away from the courts, what lessons will these criminals learn?

[bex1218]

there was a time when 13 years old was considered an adult. Boys and girls were married and started families. Boys were sent off to war, worked full time as apprentices to various smiths, and were for all intents and purposes treated as an adult. Somewhere along the line, we decided to continue babying them all.

But also, back then there were diseases and such that people died in their 30's. Now we can live longer due to modern medicine (though sometimes natural remedies work best with some stuff). But thats a whole new story.

I'm sorry, but kids know what they are doing. Adults think they are just ignorant and don't know any better. If you make the decision to end someone else's life on purpose, no matter what age, you should be jailed for life. I don't care if they are 6 or 50.

[bara]

Yeah, beating some one to death and then lighting them on fire? Thats just to much crazy to let loose.

[Amanita]

yeah, this isn't like the case of that 11 year old boy who accidentally killed a playmate while wrestling and was sentenced as an adult. This was a deliberate, cruel act.

[Andara Bledin]

Yeah, beating some one to death and then lighting them on fire? Thats just to much crazy to let loose.

I have no objection to life sentences for minors who commit ugly crimes like this, but I just have to correct that they did not set the man on fire. The set fire to his home with him still inside. It's a relatively minor thing, but there is a major difference in someone being able to set fire to a person and setting fire to an object, even if there is consideration that a person will die in the ensuing blaze.

^-.-^

[Seifer]

I have no objection to life sentences for minors who commit ugly crimes like this, but I just have to correct that they did not set the man on fire. The set fire to his home with him still inside. It's a relatively minor thing, but there is a major difference in someone being able to set fire to a person and setting fire to an object, even if there is consideration that a person will die in the ensuing blaze.

I consider both just as cruel, since the victim is still going to feel the pain of being burned alive. They're also going to feel the terror of being trapped in a blaze - choking on smoke and realizing they can't save themselves.

One of the other people in the article actually did set her victims on fire.

"Ashley Jones, Alabama
She was 14 when she helped her boyfriend kill her grandfather and aunt in Birmingham by stabbing and shooting them and then setting them ablaze. Jones also tried to kill her sister, 10, prosecutors said. The Equal Justice Initiative says the now 22-year-old has turned her life around and is deserving of a chance at freedom."

Course, I think they might have been dead after having been shot and stabbed.

[SongsOfDragons]

Shades of the Jamie Bulger case...the two who did it - or at least one of them - have been given a new identity and enough stuff to try starting a new life. I think he was arrested again for drunk driving or something like that...

[Boozy]

There's something wrong with a justice system that declares two 13 year-old children as irredeemable for life.

It's a sign of a society that treats troubled teenagers like yesterday's garbage. The second that children stop being cute, they get tossed into the trash.

[Lace Neil Singer]

Shades of the Jamie Bulger case...the two who did it - or at least one of them - have been given a new identity and enough stuff to try starting a new life. I think he was arrested again for drunk driving or something like that...

Worse than that.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/ma...-porn-offences

The other one, Robert Thompson, hasn't been heard of since so we can assume he's keeping his nose clean.

Another case to consider; Mary Bell. Mary was released and given a new name.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...the-world.html

She hasn't repeated the crime for which she was jailed.

[Gravekeeper]

There's something wrong with a justice system that declares two 13 year-old children as irredeemable for life.

It's a sign of a society that treats troubled teenagers like yesterday's garbage. The second that children stop being cute, they get tossed into the trash.

There's a difference between "Troubled" and "Psychotic". You're not going to redeem the latter, sad as it is. Willfully burning someone to death is not "troubled". Its a psychotic lack of empathy. I, for one, was smart enough at 13 to grasp the concept that fire hurts and would be a horrible way to die.

Recall the Reena Virk case over here. Swarmed, beaten, set her hair on fire, put cigarettes out on her face. Finally let her go after they realised they were going too far. But one 15 year old girl didn't think it was far enough and followed Virk, beat the crap out of her again, this time mortally ( she wouldn't have survived the head wounds anyway ), then dragged her to the side of the river and held her underwater till she stopped struggling. Then rolled the body into the river. Then bragged about it at school the following day.

She's serving a life sentence now for obvious reasons. Minor or not, there's a limit to what you can do before its simply inexcusable.

[DrFaroohk]

I feel like there's something wrong with a society where one can have all the responsibilities and consequences of adulthood at 13, and yet none of the privileges.

[AdminAssistant]

There's also something wrong with a 10 and 11 year old setting up a firing range in the woods outside their school, pulling the fire alarm, opening fire on their classmates, killing 5....and both being released on their 21st birthday. (Would have been 18th birthday if not for federal weapons charges.) I think if they can prove that kind of premeditation, then they should be tried as adults regardless of age.

[Lace Neil Singer]

You mean like paying taxes?

[SongsOfDragons]

I #do# think that if the child criminal is deemed by professionals to no longer be a danger to anyone, especially if as Gravekeeper said they were more to the 'troubled' side than the 'psychotic', then they should get that second chance of a new ID - and the press should leave them the hell alone! But the insidious sensationalist alarmist press is another rant altogether.

I'm really glad that Robert Thompson and Mary Bell (thanks for that link, I didn't know about that case) have been able to demonstrate their deserving of this chance.