US court approves life without parole for 14-year-old

Byrnzie

mickeyrat wrote:

Hmm, I wonder what kind of terror the kid getting beaten felt as he was held by his feet and ankles over a ledge some 50 ft in the air. Wonder he might say about this sentence. Oh wait , he cant say anything.

Nobody here's saying the killer should get off scott free.

He should be punished. But is life imprisonment right for someone of his age?

And you can imagine the same scenerio with regards to an adult committing the same crime...but should the death penalty then be applied?
My opinion is that no matter how dispicable the crime, we should rise above it if we have any pretence to a higher form of morality and/or justice. We should never allow ourselves to be dragged down to the same level as these scumbags. And the test of our supposed loftier morality comes in the face of the sickest of crimes.

Shawshank

At 14 he knows right from wrong, and the problem I have with this case is it's hard to know what the right call is. There's no doubt what he did was evil and malicious. At 37, I'm not the same person I was at 14, 21 or even 30 for that matter. People change just as much emotionally as they do physiologically. I can see this kid at the age of 60, and it reminds me of Morgan Freeman's character at the end of Shawshank Redemption:

There's not a day goes by I don't feel regret. Not because I'm in here, or because you think I should. I look back on the way I was then: a young, stupid kid who committed that terrible crime. I want to talk to him. I want to try and talk some sense to him, tell him the way things are. But I can't. That kid's long gone and this old man is all that's left. I got to live with that. Rehabilitated? It's just a bullshit word. So you go on and stamp your form, sonny, and stop wasting my time. Because to tell you the truth, I don't give a shit.

Byrnzie

Shawshank wrote:

There's not a day goes by I don't feel regret. Not because I'm in here, or because you think I should. I look back on the way I was then: a young, stupid kid who committed that terrible crime. I want to talk to him. I want to try and talk some sense to him, tell him the way things are. But I can't. That kid's long gone and this old man is all that's left. I got to live with that. Rehabilitated? It's just a bullshit word. So you go on and stamp your form, sonny, and stop wasting my time. Because to tell you the truth, I don't give a shit.

+1

mickeyrat

Byrnzie wrote:

mickeyrat wrote:

Hmm, I wonder what kind of terror the kid getting beaten felt as he was held by his feet and ankles over a ledge some 50 ft in the air. Wonder he might say about this sentence. Oh wait , he cant say anything.

Nobody here's saying the killer should get off scott free.

He should be punished. But is life imprisonment right for someone of his age?

And you can imagine the same scenerio with regards to an adult committing the same crime...but should the death penalty then be applied?
My opinion is that no matter how dispicable the crime, we should rise above it if we have any pretence to a higher form of morality and/or justice. We should never allow ourselves to be dragged down to the same level as these scumbags. And the test of our supposed loftier morality comes in the face of the sickest of crimes.

Any prison time whether in only the juvenile system or on to the adult system and this kid is fucked regardless. Typically , the sentence for murder is 25 to life. Meaning 25 yrs served before a parole hearing. As I said this kid is fucked any which way. Parole or not. What type of job is possible for a convicted and paroled murderer or time served convicted murderer?

Maybe the kindest thing IS in fact to lock him up for life.

haffajappa

It's tough for sure.
But beating a person senselessly and throwing him off a building? If you don't know at 14 there's something wrong with that, you parents definitely failed big time. However, the sentencing issue makes me have mixed feelings... Perhaps they are too young to know and undergo the punishments or consequences of an adult, but were evidently old enough to carry out a gruesome crime like that... and makes me feel as though they deserve severe punishment for their actions.

haffajappa

Shawshank wrote:

At 14 he knows right from wrong, and the problem I have with this case is it's hard to know what the right call is. There's no doubt what he did was evil and malicious. At 37, I'm not the same person I was at 14, 21 or even 30 for that matter. People change just as much emotionally as they do physiologically. I can see this kid at the age of 60, and it reminds me of Morgan Freeman's character at the end of Shawshank Redemption:

There's not a day goes by I don't feel regret. Not because I'm in here, or because you think I should. I look back on the way I was then: a young, stupid kid who committed that terrible crime. I want to talk to him. I want to try and talk some sense to him, tell him the way things are. But I can't. That kid's long gone and this old man is all that's left. I got to live with that. Rehabilitated? It's just a bullshit word. So you go on and stamp your form, sonny, and stop wasting my time. Because to tell you the truth, I don't give a shit.

love that movie.
(so do you, i'm assuming, from your name and avatar lol)

Hugh Freaking Dillon

I have no issue with this. animals need to be caged.

zarocat

Byrnzie wrote:

Shawshank wrote:

There's not a day goes by I don't feel regret. Not because I'm in here, or because you think I should. I look back on the way I was then: a young, stupid kid who committed that terrible crime. I want to talk to him. I want to try and talk some sense to him, tell him the way things are. But I can't. That kid's long gone and this old man is all that's left. I got to live with that. Rehabilitated? It's just a bullshit word. So you go on and stamp your form, sonny, and stop wasting my time. Because to tell you the truth, I don't give a shit.

+1

+2

Eliot Rosewater

Dirty Frankfurter wrote:

I have no issue with this. animals need to be caged.

And along the same lines as Byrnzie's post, I would argue that it would take an animal to put a child in a cage for the rest of his or her life.

The point here is that at only 14 years old, none of us knew what we know now. The jumps in maturity, physically, emotionally, spiritually etc., are astounding between even a 14 year old and 18 year old. This is why we have a juvenile court system. To completely circumvent that sound logic is absurd. I would argue that it is criminal.

I agree with a previous post that I am not who I was at 14. Not even close. And not what I was at 18 or 25 etc. We learn, we grow, we mature. Society has set the "legal age" at 18, right? So if that's the consensus, let's stop locking kids up as if they were adults. Lock them up as kids for what they are and follow the guidelines we setup to handle things like this when kids break the law.

It's mind-boggling to me. Trying a child as an adult makes as little sense as trying the police in the Rodney King beating as if they were black. The offender is either a child or an adult. At 14 years old, he was clearly a child. Let's not pick and choose when it suits one group's agenda.

haffajappa

Eliot Rosewater wrote:

Dirty Frankfurter wrote:

I have no issue with this. animals need to be caged.

And along the same lines as Byrnzie's post, I would argue that it would take an animal to put a child in a cage for the rest of his or her life.

The point here is that at only 14 years old, none of us knew what we know now. The jumps in maturity, physically, emotionally, spiritually etc., are astounding between even a 14 year old and 18 year old. This is why we have a juvenile court system. To completely circumvent that sound logic is absurd. I would argue that it is criminal.

I agree with a previous post that I am not who I was at 14. Not even close. And not what I was at 18 or 25 etc. We learn, we grow, we mature. Society has set the "legal age" at 18, right? So if that's the consensus, let's stop locking kids up as if they were adults. Lock them up as kids for what they are and follow the guidelines we setup to handle things like this when kids break the law.

It's mind-boggling to me. Trying a child as an adult makes as little sense as trying the police in the Rodney King beating as if they were black. The offender is either a child or an adult. At 14 years old, he was clearly a child. Let's not pick and choose when it suits one group's agenda.

Well, to be fair though,
I don't know about everyone else.... But at 14 years old, as immature as I might have been compared to now, I'd know it was WRONG to beat up a person and throw them off a 5 story parkade....

SatansFuton

Eliot Rosewater wrote:

And along the same lines as Byrnzie's post, I would argue that it would take an animal to put a child in a cage for the rest of his or her life.

The point here is that at only 14 years old, none of us knew what we know now. The jumps in maturity, physically, emotionally, spiritually etc., are astounding between even a 14 year old and 18 year old. This is why we have a juvenile court system. To completely circumvent that sound logic is absurd. I would argue that it is criminal.

I agree with a previous post that I am not who I was at 14. Not even close. And not what I was at 18 or 25 etc. We learn, we grow, we mature. Society has set the "legal age" at 18, right? So if that's the consensus, let's stop locking kids up as if they were adults. Lock them up as kids for what they are and follow the guidelines we setup to handle things like this when kids break the law.

It's mind-boggling to me. Trying a child as an adult makes as little sense as trying the police in the Rodney King beating as if they were black. The offender is either a child or an adult. At 14 years old, he was clearly a child. Let's not pick and choose when it suits one group's agenda.

Well, while 18 is the legal voting age, it is not the national age of criminal responsibility. It is 18 in some states, but in many states (including Wisconsin) you are considered mature enough to be responsible for your own actions at 17. The young man in question here was a few months shy of his 17th b-day when he was sentenced. And as I said before (well I didn't really say it, I was quoting the court documents) his sentence was based on his continued actions up until his sentencing. It wasn't solely based on what he did as a 14 year old. The other kid in the case, who seems to be pretty much equally responsible, did not get the same sentence. He still got a chunk of a sentence, but not life without parole. Omer's sentence reflects his actions since the murder, including threatening witnesses and the judge. And it would appear that at age 26 he continues to act like a dong-hole. They didn't throw some little kid wearing his Pokemon pajamas into a cage, and the sentence was not solely based on what he did at 14.

And there has to be some flexibility in the law. Just as they bent the law to punish this kid as an adult, they make exceptions for people as well. There are loopholes and consideration that benefit people. Mentally handicapped people often get different treatment, yes they are technically adults who committed a crime, and don't get off completely, but their mental capacity is taken into account, sometimes. The law is not black and white, and they felt this young man (about to be an adult) needed to be punished as an adult. What would you say they do to a "kid" who commits a crime a few days before his birthday when he turns legally into an adult? If the legal age in your state is 18, and a person commits a crime when he is 17 years, 11 months and 364 days old, should he still be put on trial as a minor? In this case he was almost 15, and on the verge of being an adult (17 in WI) when sentenced, but they felt what he did was more serious than what they could legally do to him as a minor. Whether it was "right" or not is debatable (this thread is evidence of that) but it is not absurd. Dropping a human being to their death is absurd. Being tried as a minor is there for people who actually don't know any better, not as a loophole to do what you want and get a slap on the wrist.

I understand we all grow, and see the error of our ways as we get older. As somebody else said, they can look back at themselves as recently as 30 years old and see how much they've grown since then. But how many second chances can people get? This is real life, with real consequenses, at what point do we draw the line? Killing somebody is serious business. Yes we all grow up, but if somebody killed one of our loved ones then got himself a little Jailhouse Jesus, few of us would care or trust him/her to re-enter society, or want him/her to do so, just because they're smarter now. We all make decisions in life we have to live with. This kid made one. And after he made it, he continued to make bad decisions. If he just screwed up at age 14, then showed remorse, attempted to make amends and took responsibility for his actions, we probably wouldn't be discussing this case. Much the same way we aren't talking about the other kid in the case. The closest this kid came to even an apology was to say that he could understand why the family was upset, but there was nothing he could do about it now. As true as it may be, it is not what the family (and he did say it in response to a speech given by the victim's brother) wants to hear. Basically saying what's done is done and let's just move on. If he's not even making an effort for himself, why should the legal system make an effort to put him back on the street?

It is easy to sit here and call the judge an "asshole" when we have never met the guy. Who knows, if we were to sit down and talk to him he might tell us it was a decision that kept him up nights, and tell us how and why he went with the life without parole judgement. He has looked into the kids eyes, talked to him, been threatened by him, and it is possible that he came to his decision out of concern for the safety of himself and others. Not just to be a douche. I think the WM3 case has really jaded a lot of us when it comes to the justice system, but I think the bad guy here is the murderer and not the judge who came down with a harsh sentence.

It would be nice to be able to rehabilitate all criminals, help them see the error of their ways, and put them back into society, to make them honest/productive people and not keep them locked up in cages. And while it can work for some, as a general philosophy it is naive. And it is easy to sit from afar and say that we shouldn't keep murderes locked up forever because people can change, to be an armchair philosopher and point out the problems of the criminal justice system. But these are real problems, and people are really dead. I'm betting nobody here runs a halfway house out of their home that takes in convicted murderers. I can sit here and say "it's wrong, he learned his lesson, let him out", but I bet I would change my tune if they released him into my neighborhood. I'm not saying that I want everybody locked up forever, but when it comes to murder, I don't think it makes anybody an animal for supporting it. Releasing a murderer is gambling with other peoples lives.

Contrary to what has been said, this was not a "little kid" (he was 2 months shy of 15) who didn't understand what he was doing. He was legally a minor, but old enough to know what he was doing, while 14-15 is a minor, I don't consider them "little kids". Yes a 14-15 year old is immature, but knows that you don't kill another human being. He did something terrible, and as an adult appears to still be a terrible person. I'm pretty sure all of us on this board managed not to commit murder when we were kids/teenagers. Because we knew better, and he knew better. I think the key thing to remember when discussing this case is his age when sentenced. They did not toss a 14 year old kid in the state pen. He was on the verge of being legally adult. The imagery of a small child being tossed in prison is being used here, as if some little kid with a teddy bear was tossed in a cell with Dennis Rader, when it is simply not true. He commited the crime at 14, not thrown into Oz at 14. By the time he landed in the penitentiary he was legally an adult, and now at 26 still a dickhead by all accounts, apparently wearing this kids murder as a feather in his cap. That may be posturing for the sake of survival in prison, trying to act tough, but it doesn't help his case.

Eliot Rosewater

haffajappa wrote:

Eliot Rosewater wrote:

Dirty Frankfurter wrote:

I have no issue with this. animals need to be caged.

And along the same lines as Byrnzie's post, I would argue that it would take an animal to put a child in a cage for the rest of his or her life.

The point here is that at only 14 years old, none of us knew what we know now. The jumps in maturity, physically, emotionally, spiritually etc., are astounding between even a 14 year old and 18 year old. This is why we have a juvenile court system. To completely circumvent that sound logic is absurd. I would argue that it is criminal.

I agree with a previous post that I am not who I was at 14. Not even close. And not what I was at 18 or 25 etc. We learn, we grow, we mature. Society has set the "legal age" at 18, right? So if that's the consensus, let's stop locking kids up as if they were adults. Lock them up as kids for what they are and follow the guidelines we setup to handle things like this when kids break the law.

It's mind-boggling to me. Trying a child as an adult makes as little sense as trying the police in the Rodney King beating as if they were black. The offender is either a child or an adult. At 14 years old, he was clearly a child. Let's not pick and choose when it suits one group's agenda.

Well, to be fair though,
I don't know about everyone else.... But at 14 years old, as immature as I might have been compared to now, I'd know it was WRONG to beat up a person and throw them off a 5 story parkade....

I agree. And I think we can assume that he knew it was WRONG. But did he fully understand the ramifications? I wouldn't think so. Is it easier for a 14 year old to get caught up in the moment or push limits without thinking things through? I think so. There are valid reasons for classifying people as children or adults. A 14 year old is a child....any way you look at it.

Blockhead

Coming from a fathers point of view, if you deliberately end my childs life then you also lose your "right" to live.
At 14 you should understand the ramifications of your actions... You might not understand how that will effect family members, community, your own family, etc.

catefrances

Byrnzie wrote:

Though I do agree with an earlier poster that the parents should be punished for crimes like these. If your 10 year old, or 14 year old kills someone, then some of the punishment should fall on the parents.

some of the punishment?? which part did you have in mind? are you speaking incarceration or just a hefty fine?? im assuming that because in these cases the child is incarcerated, thats what you mean for the parent/s as well. and which parent.. mother??... father??... both??

Hugh Freaking Dillon

Eliot Rosewater wrote:

Dirty Frankfurter wrote:

I have no issue with this. animals need to be caged.

And along the same lines as Byrnzie's post, I would argue that it would take an animal to put a child in a cage for the rest of his or her life.

The point here is that at only 14 years old, none of us knew what we know now. The jumps in maturity, physically, emotionally, spiritually etc., are astounding between even a 14 year old and 18 year old. This is why we have a juvenile court system. To completely circumvent that sound logic is absurd. I would argue that it is criminal.

I agree with a previous post that I am not who I was at 14. Not even close. And not what I was at 18 or 25 etc. We learn, we grow, we mature. Society has set the "legal age" at 18, right? So if that's the consensus, let's stop locking kids up as if they were adults. Lock them up as kids for what they are and follow the guidelines we setup to handle things like this when kids break the law.

It's mind-boggling to me. Trying a child as an adult makes as little sense as trying the police in the Rodney King beating as if they were black. The offender is either a child or an adult. At 14 years old, he was clearly a child. Let's not pick and choose when it suits one group's agenda.

the whole idea behind moving a "child" up to adult court is the fact that you are allowing the law to treat each offender on a case-by-case basis. if you draw the line at a specific age, down to the date, then the law is more flawed. you can't assume that everyone is at the exact same mental/emotional/physical maturity level at the same age.

by your logic, then someone who also got convicted of a horrible crime at age 30 is not the same person as they are at age 50, so hey, let's turn em loose!

I am 36. Am I the same person I was at 14? Of course not. But you know what? I, UNDER NO CIRCUMSTACES, EVER would have callously thrown someone to their death. that person deserves special treatment in the courts.

Hugh Freaking Dillon

Eliot Rosewater wrote:

I agree. And I think we can assume that he knew it was WRONG. But did he fully understand the ramifications? I wouldn't think so. Is it easier for a 14 year old to get caught up in the moment or push limits without thinking things through? I think so. There are valid reasons for classifying people as children or adults. A 14 year old is a child....any way you look at it.

a 14 year old is not a child, actually. 2 years away from being legally allowed to be in sole charge of a thousand pounds of metal at mind-boggling speeds............4 years away from being able to injest alcohol unsupervised..........1 or 2 years away from being able to hold down a job.........legally allowed to have sex with someone of the same age............is that a child to you?

Eliot Rosewater

Dirty Frankfurter wrote:

Eliot Rosewater wrote:

I agree. And I think we can assume that he knew it was WRONG. But did he fully understand the ramifications? I wouldn't think so. Is it easier for a 14 year old to get caught up in the moment or push limits without thinking things through? I think so. There are valid reasons for classifying people as children or adults. A 14 year old is a child....any way you look at it.

a 14 year old is not a child, actually. 2 years away from being legally allowed to be in sole charge of a thousand pounds of metal at mind-boggling speeds............4 years away from being able to injest alcohol unsupervised..........1 or 2 years away from being able to hold down a job.........legally allowed to have sex with someone of the same age............is that a child to you?

Ummm....yeah. You pretty much proved my point. X amount of YEARS away from doing those things.

Oh and btw, the dictionary disagrees with your definition of child too.

child   
[chahyld]
–noun, plural chil·dren.
1. a person between birth and full growth

catefrances

Dirty Frankfurter wrote:

Eliot Rosewater wrote:

I agree. And I think we can assume that he knew it was WRONG. But did he fully understand the ramifications? I wouldn't think so. Is it easier for a 14 year old to get caught up in the moment or push limits without thinking things through? I think so. There are valid reasons for classifying people as children or adults. A 14 year old is a child....any way you look at it.

a 14 year old is not a child, actually. 2 years away from being legally allowed to be in sole charge of a thousand pounds of metal at mind-boggling speeds............4 years away from being able to injest alcohol unsupervised..........1 or 2 years away from being able to hold down a job.........legally allowed to have sex with someone of the same age............is that a child to you?

i live with a 14 year old and hes far from being an adult. and if hes far from being an adult that means hes a child.

force-10

Eliot Rosewater wrote:

I agree. And I think we can assume that he knew it was WRONG. But did he fully understand the ramifications? I wouldn't think so. Is it easier for a 14 year old to get caught up in the moment or push limits without thinking things through? I think so. There are valid reasons for classifying people as children or adults. A 14 year old is a child....any way you look at it.

You posted you have a 9 year old. What if your child would have been the victim? In such case, what if you would have witnessed such crime? In such anger many of us, I believe, being adults, would have choked the 14 year old to death. How would you sentence yourself or any other parent?

Of course, I am talking hipothecaly, but comes to show how a court or judge can "bend" the law accordingly. If it were up to me, I would have in mind my unborn child, my brother, my dad, and my grandfather. If that kid would have escaped, I wonder how regreted he would have been. But I am no judge and for a good reason I guess. I would have beaten the crap out of him!

force-10

Comes to show that you don´t need a gun to do a terrible crime, but that´s a whole other argument.