Charging minors as "adults"

Is the victim any less dead because he was killed by a minor?

Did the rock tossers know it was wrong, or that it could cause injury?

Did an adult enable and/or force the minors to toss rocks onto the highway?

Will other minors learn from these minors' mistake and know it's wrong and that there are real consequences?

I Hope They ALL DO SERIOUS Time ! I Heard Over 20 Rocks and A Tire ! WTF !I

This is not a business contract. It is murder.

I suggest that you read up on the difference between civil and criminal law for the answer to your question. 

Obviously they are "Bad Kids"  and should be put aside from society in some way.

But everyone has opinions on our archaic "Penal System".  What's the best option ?  Long sentence (makes $$ for the system,  refines Criminals) or 'The Chair'  (less tax $$) or my version,  eco-friendly and sustainable:  Tilapia farm food.  Could be Catfish or even Hogs,  but I think most here would approve of raising Fish over Pigs.

Face, could you weigh in?

After hurricane Sandy the state of New Jersey began a grant program to aid home owners with rebuilding. One stipulation was that you could not begin construction until provisions of the program were finalized. The problem was that nobody knew how long this would take, and 10 months pasted before the program was in place.

I didn't wait, I borrowed the money and began the construction process 4 months after the storm.

What do you think?

Is it fair that I was ineligible for the grant money?

Perhaps you can explain in ideological terms why there should be a difference?

It doesn't matter what my ideology is in this matter. The different types of law were codified long before I gained consciousness. As I grew, I learned that breaking the laws, just or unjust, carried penalties. 

Rehabilitation and a more reasonable sentence makes sense for a 15 year old with an undeveloped frontal lobe. 

Metallica - Kill 'Em All 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=aAITxlCsj4Y

They had McDonald's after they killed this guy. Fuck 'em, they aren't fit for society.

hey how do you do the thing where people’s quotes end up between those lines like a quote sandwich 

I charge them more than adults when selling beer in the lot.

I think that’s entirely appropriate. If you don’t advertise that the beer is priced less for minors then they should have to pay at least the full, adult price. 

OP is insane 

hey how do you do the thing where people’s quotes end up between those lines like a quote sandwich 

Copy and paste the text, highlight it, click quotation mark button (") on the tool bar 

Isn’t America just the worst?

>>I might even understand if we all got "tested" starting at age 12 re: current state of affairs in terms of culpability in relation to age<

At least 20 rocks were found at the scene. At age 15 one understands that hitting somebody or or something with a rock can cause damage and injury.  

Face, is an individual not responsible for their own actions?

Sliding scale of "knew or should have known".

 >>If a toddler is an "individual", and all individuals are responsible for their own actions, then is a toddler responsible for one's actions?<<

I did not state that all individuals are responsible for their own actions. Frankly, i didn't believe that I needed to clarify this. But since you ask, no, a toddler should not be held responsible in the same manner as a teenager. So there is no confusion, I wouldn't hold an infant responsible either.

Do you feel an individual is ever responsible for their actions? 

However, who's to say they knew all of the ramifications of their actions as an "adult" might?

Since you mentioned that we should all get "tested," what do you suggest happens to an adult who doesn't "understand?" I'm also confused about your thought of "current state of affairs.: Not sure what that is supposed to mean. 

Do you feel an individual is ever responsible for their threads? 

____________________________________________

quote:

Not sure what that is supposed to mean

____________________________________

i was wondering the same thing 

When I was a wee lad we used to do things like lobbing pieces of fruit down to the untravelled street below, where cars were maybe going 15 MPH. Even at a young age, I'm pretty sure I knew not to throw 6 lb rocks onto a crowded highway, were cars are flying.

As to the original question, I'm really not sure.

You should become a lawyer with all the free time you have.

.

Face, did you ever see that X Files episode about the Brady Bunch house?

i think u would dig it

>It doesn't strike anyone as strange that someone who's 15 isn't allowed to obtain a driver's license, yet can charged as an adult?<

No,  not strange when you kill somebody.

> what about being old enough to get drafted, but still too young to legally drink / smoke<

When was the last time someone was drafted?

Almost everything should be 18 - smoking/drinking/driving/voting/going to war/contracts/etc.

Preferably all at the same time.

Being charged as an adult still needs to be on a variable scale, according to the circumstances.

This happened here a few years ago. People are sick. Woman was in the hospital for a year, never was the same. then her husband killed himself.

Kids are locked up where they belong

All volunteer force seems to work ok. Just bad decisions made by the decision makers. Naturally correct me if your opinion differs.

 should a person who kills somebody (and charged as an adult) have been able to petition the DMV to be granted a driver's license prior to having committed murder?  I am truly curious.<

No. 

That's a silly question

>However, your response didn't address the question directly.

No, I do not find it bothersome.

Nor am I concerned about the draft.

>> Why is it a silly question?

LOL

>Why is it a silly question?

It is irrelevant to the discussion.

Surprised that no one has referenced or mentioned that scumbag kid in Santa Cruz who raped that 8 yr old girl named Madison.

"A Santa Cruz County judge ruled that a teenager charged with rape and murder in the slaying of an 8-year-old neighbor will be prosecuted as an adult — eliminating the possibility he could be released at age 23 if convicted as a minor, court officials said.

Adrian “A.J.” Gonzalez was 15 years old when he was charged with offenses including murder with the special circumstances of lying in wait, murder in the course of forcible rape, and kidnapping in the July 2015 death of Madyson “Maddy” Middleton.

Gonzalez, now 18, had spent years in juvenile hall but was immediately placed into adult custody Tuesday after Santa Cruz County Superior Court Judge John Salazar ruled the teenager would be tried as an adult, said Sue Huckins, a court spokeswoman.

With Tuesday’s decision, Gonzalez could face life in prison if convicted. He will now re-enter the court system, this time as an adult, with an arraignment scheduled for the end of November."

http://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/Teen-to-be-tried-as-an-adult-in-rape...


>>> In this particular case, while I can see that this will forever ruin this boy's future - he deserves all the weight the law can give him and the fate that awaits him in an adult prison for raping an 8 yr old.

Because murder and driving privileges are very different.

I'm done, Face, you are ridiculous..

> Face, you are ridiculous..

its fucking scary and a little sad

Nothing to learn there, Face, you're just being a nudnik

BUT! WHAT! ABOUT!!.. 

THE RULE OF LAW

?!?!?!?!?!

Murder is Murder. Mr Byrd is dead and  Pedro Salinas, Sean Carter, Demetrius Wimberly, and William Parker are responsible for his death. I have no problem with these murderers being charged as adults. 

child killers 

great topic 

>>Where do you draw the line?

Good question. 

I'll say 12. 

Face, at what age do you hold an individual responsible for their actions. 

let's draw the line at murder

A couple of dumb kids go to an overpass, and to have fun throw some shit off. They cause a fatal accident.

A couple of kids go to an overpass, and in the hopes of causing an accident they throw shit off and cause a fatal accident.

Should the penalty be the same for both sets of kids?

are the other ones dumb too?

>> couple of dumb kids go to an overpass, and to have fun throw some shit off. They cause a fatal accident.

A couple of kids go to an overpass, and in the hopes of causing an accident they throw shit off and cause a fatal accident.

Should the penalty be the same for both sets of

Negligent homicide vs murder/manslaughter

I'm ok with both groups being charged as adults

All teenagers are dumb. 

The penalties are very different for murder and man slaughter. Should a 12 year old be eligible for the death penalty?

^No, but I'm opposed to the death penalty.

Not in favor of life without parole for minors either

We shouldn’t have the death penalty.

Why isn't Thom in here raging for the sacred Rule of Law? 

Bueler? 

So, if you don’t want the penalties to potentially be the same as adults, why charge them as adults?

I’m not trying to be disagreeable here. It’s a really interesting subject with a lot of nuances.

I fully agree about the death penalty and life without parole.

Doesn't really matter, these nice kids aren't getting the death penalty.

nice white kids, that is

Brian, that's all the nuance there is. I'm fine with a thirteen year old spending 20 years in prison

May as well give him life without parole then. The recidivism rate for a 33 y/o, who has spent 20 years in prison, has to be 100%.

So, try the hem as adults, but show some sort of leniency in sentencing (depending on the max penalty)?

I like the idea of alternative sentencing. Maybe a work-release type scenario where they basically go to Juvi, get a diploma, have a shitload of community service ideally with victim involvement to grow some empathy (for goodness sake). Let them rehab into better young adults with an extremely tight leash if they eventually qualify for release.

But Ned, now you’re suggesting a reformation of the entire criminal justice system! Bite your tongue!

Ned's a softy. 

edit: it's endearing.

> May as well give him life without parole then. The recidivism rate for a 33 y/o, who has spent 20 years in prison, has to be 100%

Lesson there is, don't kill anybody

Fuck off, Floops ... I'm dropping a virtual sandbag on your French ass right now.

No, really, Ned. I'd vote for you. 

>Lesson there is, don't kill anybody

lol

Really cannot figure out why this is so difficult for you...

If a minor does not want to be charged as an adult, the aforementioned minor should not kill or rape anyone. 

^No, not at all like that. Damn you are obtuse.

It's "like" when a  minor commits a capital crime, that minor may be charged as an adult.  

^It is called emancipation...

Emancipation of Minors

It seems like every child wonders when he or she can be treated like an adult. The answer usually varies depending on whether they are asking their parents or the legal system. In family law cases, emancipation of a minor (also called "divorce from parents") refers to a court process through which a minor can become legally recognized as an independent adult. Through emancipation, a minor can take responsibility for his or her own welfare, and make the major decisions that parents typically would handle. Therefore, minors will generally need to establish their ability to independently live and support themselves before a court will grant emancipation. FindLaw’s emancipation section has details on emancipation laws as well as the procedures for minors to become emancipated.

http://family.findlaw.com/emancipation-of-minors.html

>> The point being:  "minors" can only be punished as adults, yet never "rewarded" as such <<

If a minor wins gold at the Olympics, it is the same reward if they were 18+.

If a minor invents a product that makes millions, he is rewarded as such. It may look slightly different legally, but the reward is there.

FOM - You bring up a good point ^^^

With that way of thinking...

Question is "How would you do it?"

Wouldn't that come down to state rights?

Face is asking why they can't vote or drink or smoke. 

I have no issues with those restrictions, face

Face, why can't a 25 year old be president? 

13 year olds get charged as adults to get into a movie but can’t get into adult movies and I’m ok with all of that because who gives a shit what 13 year olds think 

Face, why do you think the age restriction was included in the Constitution?

After reading this article:  https://www.cnn.com/2021/12/04/us/michigan-oxford-high-school-shooting-saturday/index.html   I think the parents should have the higher charge, they basically gave him the green light....

I would like to think the Prosecutor has some more overwhelming unreleased evidence. 

As tragic / bad as this shooting is, I'm having a hard time digesting why the kid is being charged as an adult if the parents are also being charged with involuntary manslaughter.

Because he planned and carried out a crime that is quite adult in intent, complexity, and effect; as the court obviously agrees, and likely so will a jury.

and because his parents enabled him directly they are also culpable. They were essentially accessories to murder before the fact.

though at this point (four years along) I'm not sure it's an inability to digest as much as an unwillingness

I agree with the conventional wisdom If you can't do the time, don't do the crime. In the case of minors being charged as adults, I think a sentencing recommendation for something less than life is prison might be appropriate in some situations, but that would need to be evaluated under strict guidelines on a case-by-case basis.

> how independent was the 15 yo's decision? 

It's hard to imagine the Michigan shooter didn't know that opening fire on his schoolmates would be anything but a very bad thing indeed. The note he made to himself on the doodles he was found making in class (“Blood everywhere...The thoughts won’t stop. Help me.”) seems to be a clear indication he knew what he was thinking about doing was wrong.

I would think that kind of awareness would a major factor in making a determination of whether a minor should be tried as an adult. My understanding is that if a person, whether a minor or adult, is found to be incapable of making judgments like that due to mental illness, they can't be convicted of a crime. The inverse should also be true.

I suspect he did know what he was doing was wrong, but does this awareness in itself raise the bar for a minor to be charged as an adult? 

Yes, that's part of what is weighed in the prosecutor's charging decision.

the parents "influence" over his decisions doesn't matter at this point as it's not  in question, legally. That's not gaslighting.
 

That's a defense argument for him to make to a jury, that the DA would then argue against.

This is also why the parents at this point are being charged with an involuntary crime. There doesn't need to be any intent proven for the parents to be determined guilty. 
 

I'm still not really down with charging a 15 year old as an adult, even if he did go on a killing spree. If he does get convicted they may as well give life without parole, because he has virtually no chance of ever successfully integrating back into society.

On another note, how about the school passing the buck? The parents wouldn't take him home and his parents wouldn't check his backpack? What the fuck is that? If the school deemed him at threat they had every right (and responsibility) to isolate him, search his shit, and call the police or mental health screeners. As it was the 2nd time in a few days, and he was on school grounds. The parents' inactions are not an excuse for theirs. They clearly saw him as an immediate threat and did not follow most of the standard procedures in that situation. 

Agreed, BK. The school saw him as a threat, and allowed him to return to class. There should be some culpability there.

If, in 2021 the school didn't have a policy for a student displaying an active threat to self or others, there's a real problem.

BK were you down with Kyle Rittenhouse being charged as an adult? Why or why not? Aside from being in a different state, is this different? How?

curious. totally agree about the red flags.

I'm not really as much for or against, as just trying to grasp the perspectives

Fair question, Bss. I wrestled with Rittenhouse being charged as an adult, but ultimately was okay with it. He was almost 18 (which is a magical age, I guess). There's an immense difference in growth, maturity, and brain development between 15 and 18 year olds.

...

There's an immense difference in growth, maturity, and brain development between 15 and 18 year olds.

You can drive (and kill people with) a car in most states at fifteen years of age.

In many of them; fourteen.

With parental consent, American children can sign up to go kill Al Qaeda at age 17...

common law (which like 1/3 of the world lives under) says females are adults at age 12, and 14 for males

That's not saying I disagree with you. Just that somehow we apparently like to draw a lot of imaginary lines between childhood and adulthood that don't make much sense to me

Agreed, which is the impetus for my "magical age" comment.

> There's an immense difference in growth, maturity, and brain development between 15 and 18 year olds.

While this is true in some ways--the frontal lobe, which is where executive functioning takes place, isn't as well-developed in a 15 year old as in an 18 year old--most children have been taught the basics of impulse control and cultural standards of what's right and what's wrong long before they reach 15 years old.

If you've arrived at a foregone conclusion that he deserves to be charged as an adult, then sure ...

lol

The people of the state of Michigan's conclusions are the only ones that matter here.

This isn't theory, man. It is actually happening.

Face is your argument here that this kid should not be charged as an adult?

You do understand that the child (his attorney) can and will challenge the charges, right?

That he will motion to move this into the youth court based on all of those circumstances and more? And that could very well be approved. That they will spend probably the next six or so months just on this very thing?

He retains that right.

It is possible that the parents and the child each contributed equally here. Split three ways. Is there not? That's more of a civil law thing.

> Either the parents were the big push or the kid acted on his own, but not both

That's a logical fallacy (False Dilemma). There can be shared culpability. The parents should have secured the firearm and taken action when confronted with the facts of their child's threatening behaviors, and the child should have known that shooting up his school was wrong.

I don't think I'm going out on a limb by guessing that mental health had something to do with it. Hasn't it played a big part in virtually every school shooting?

>>>>> The parents should have secured the firearm and taken action when confronted with the facts of their child's threatening behaviors, and the child should have known that shooting up his school was wrong.

This.

Here's something kind of chilling to ponder. You're the Michigan shooter and your parents and school administrators are having a meeting about your violent doodles and cries for help. You are sitting in the next room with your backpack on your lap weighing your options while the grown ups talk. What goes through your mind?

Minors who do serious crimes absolutely should be tried as adults, that's the law in Ct and most other states. Parents should also face charges for allowing minors to own implements of death. Adam Lanza killed the parent who bought him his AR15,  his mother, 1st.

The teacher did the right thing notifying school administrators of the kids cry for help doodles. Administrators fucked up bigtime by allowing him back to class, he should have been sent home with his folks immediately. The school, the administrators, the district and the school board are all gonna get the shit sued out of them,, and rightly so. Loser parents deserve to do time. 

2nd Ammendment needs amending. 

This is kind of what I was getting at.  Yes, it's possible and likely everyone (and mental illness) had a hand in it, but if we split it three ways, is it fair for the end sum to be greater than one?  (i.e. mother 1/3, father 1/3, kid 1/3 might be fair as an crude example, but when you charge the kid as an adult AND the parents with culpability, how have we not started to tread on ground that's mother 1/3, father 1/3, kid 2/3?)

End sum greater than one? What are you even talking about? this is about criminal charges.

When you start trying to assign thirds of responsibility or whatever, you're conflating criminal and civil law. They're different things with very different procedures. They're not interchangeable. The parents are being charged criminally here, they aren't being sued.

Face, I don't think I took your quote out of context. I saw your statement that "at 15yo I think the kid is still under the 'spell' of the parent to one extent or another" as an extension of the flawed reasoning; you're still pulling for one way or the other. Here's the good news though: the force of desire has to be really strong to abandon reason. You've got a big heart, in other words, that seems to be wrestling with charging a 15 year old with a capital offense.

And yeah, what Bss said. From my days as a paralegal 20+ years ago, I seem to recall that civil liability can be sliced up like a pie (and it has to add up to 100%), but that's not how the criminal side works. The parents get charged and the kid gets charged in separate, but related, cases.

>>You are sitting in the next room with your backpack on your lap weighing your options while the grown ups talk. What goes through your mind?
 

That is a chilling question. I think we know the answer for this little murderer.

What happened to the kid in Florida? He pled guilty, right? I got the impression that he wished to God that he had committed suicide instead of being caught. Talk about a heavy burden to live with.

Ok man

you seem to like to talk in circles in circles in circles

enjoy your Sunday 

4 years later and it seems the only thing that has been proven is that some of those who have posted on this thread don't have a grasp at the difference between civil and criminal law. 

4 years later and it seems the only thing that has been proven is that some of those who have posted on this thread don't have a grasp at the difference between civil and criminal law. 

4 years later and it seems the only thing that has been proven is that some of those who have posted on this thread don't have a grasp at the difference between civil and criminal law. 

The rock throwing kids basically got a pass

Ethan Crumbley gets life

Mom (guilty) will be sentenced April ninth

Dads trial starts March 5th

Film at 11

so happy Gypsy Rose Is free !!!!!!!!!!!!!