She is 14. She is drug addicted. She has psychological problems. She killed two men.

[Stinky The Clown]

A 14 year old girl is in jail, charged as an adult with murder. She has a long (for a child) history of serious psychological problems. She's from an inner city home with no siblings and a single mom (who has a past that included some drug problems). The murders occurred in the course of a robbery intended to net some money to buy drugs.

To call her "troubled" is an understatement.

But to charge her as an adult?

What do you think?

[boobooday]

1. I think a 14 year old is a child

And calling her an adult doesn't help solve any problems.

[pitohui]

27. wow you don't remember age 14, do you?

not a child, only in this phony society where we ignore biological reality is 14 a child

in any case i don't care if she was 10 and was in fact it could be reasonably argued that she was a child -- at age 10 you might still be a child but you knew that murder was wrong and to murder someone in cold blood to get cash to buy drugs, absolutely, that person doesn't need to be on the same planet with decent people

tolerating evil means a less safe world for those of us who have harmed and killed no one, we can have a world where evil walks free or where kind harmless people walk free, but if we let evil walk free we're saying it's OK to lose kind harmless people to the predators among us

[TwilightGardener]

34. 14 is still a child, in many ways. Less so than 12 or 13, more so than 16 or 18.

Which is why a 14 year old is considered a minor.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

50. Then they should allowed to drive, vote, drink booze, have sex, and enter contracts.

After all, they're adults, aren't they?

[H2O Man]

55. Wrong end.

A 14-year old may well be biologically capable of reproducing, but that isn't the central issue here. It's a matter of the brain's hard-wiring. And, without any question, a 14-year old brain has not reached the point of an adult's fully developed brain. That doesn't mean that some 14-year olds aren't a heck of a lot smarter than the average adult. But it does mean that the average 14-year old's brain doesn't have the same capacity -- especially in emotionally charged situations -- to reason in the same way that adults do.

[JonLP24]

111. +1

I don't think a lot of people understand this, especially in this thread. There isn't a neurologist in this country that will tell you that a minor's brain isn't fully developed. I remember when I was 14 I stole a car with a friend at the time. Wasn't for profit or parts or whatever reasons people steal cars. It was to get away from home. I wanted and so did my friend at the time to live by ourselves. We packed all our belongings and everything which is how the police found out who we were(they actually didn't catch us til days later--they caught me hitch hiking I-17--again, I was 14. Very silly reasons to think about it now but it is one thing among a million things that I would never think about doing. My point is as a rational adult that I am, I would of made VERY different decisions than I did when I was 17.

[Gator_Matt]

106. Attention high schoolers: murder people while you're still 14!

It's ok. You're still a "child." No one here will give a damn; we'll treat YOU like the victim instead of the innocent guy shot in the head!

Seriously, the responses on this board make me ill. This is the sort of thing that turns off pragmatic voters. We all knew damn well that it was pure evil to murder someone when we were 14. She is not a child. She is a dangerous monster. Blame her upbringing if you want, but that doesn't change what she is. There are families out there grieving right now because one of their loved ones has been murdered by this scum.

[tallahasseedem]

109. I completely agree with you...

Good post.

[boobooday]

131. I'm not saying she shouldn't be punished

But just calling her an adult instead of a child?

Maybe she's an evil child. I don't pretend to be the judge of that.

But she is a child.

I have great sympathy for the victim's families.

[sendero]

2. No..

.... but nor do I think she should be freed at 18. If she can be rehabilitated, maybe at 30.

[LostinVA]

3. If she has a mental illness, she shouldn't be charged with murder anyway

[stray cat]

8. Only if not guilty by reason of insanity -

Depression is a mental illness but not an out for murder

[LostinVA]

10. This doesn't seem like she's depressed

[woo me with science]

25. Maybe, but I think the poster's point was that

having a mental illness does not mean one automatically should not be charged with murder, which is what (I thought) your post sounded like you were saying.

[woo me with science]

24. About one in four Americans has a diagnosable mental illness,

but the vast majority are capable of discerning right from wrong and being responsible for their actions.

[LostinVA]

36. It's all acoording what she has, that's my point

IF she does have a mental illness and not a personality disorder.

[woo me with science]

37. She could have a mental illness

and be entirely culpable of murder. I think we are agreeing here.

[Lochloosa]

4. Was this in Florida? She would never see the other side of the bars here.

[Stinky The Clown]

11. Maryland

[WhiteTara]

5. I'll tell you in a minute

please add the dinky link. ;)

[stray cat]

6. We need an option other than release at 18 - a 14 year old understands murder

If she can be helped not to be a predator of others then we should try to do so

[Warpy]

7. Hell no.

She's a kid and it's unclear whether she should be charged, at all. She needs a psych evaluation and to get her butt brushed into a locked treatment facility when she flunks it, as she undoubtedly will.

Kids have different brains, brains that are being rewired from childhood to the adult form. One of the things that seems to shut off is the ability to foresee consequences. Murder is like the movies to them, no blood and everybody gets paid for putting on a good show at the end.

Should she be off the street? Oh, hell yes. She just doesn't need to be in a hardcore adult prison for the rest of her life. We don't know what potential she has because she hasn't cleaned up and grown up.

Chances are good that she's damaged enough to need institutionalization for the rest of her life. However, charging a child as an adult in this case is obscene. She's a child.

[mopinko]

89. i doubt she has the requisite ability to understand the

severity of her crime. besides the fact that she is 14, if she is addicted to drugs, there is just no way she understood what she was doing. this kid needs a lot of help, and we might as well give it to her, rather than paying her room and board for the rest of her life. george bush made me feel like a recovered addict is still not really right in the head most times. but at 14, she has a prayer.
this is the whole point of a juvenile justice system. giving a troubled kid what they need to be rehabilitated. it doesn't always work, but it is always worth trying. while the brain is still under construction, there is hope to set it on the right path.
tried as an adult? absofuckinglutely absurd.

[eridani]

9. I think everyone should be tried as an adult, but that children--

--should be sentenced like children. I'd suspect that children would often be in the category of not competent to stand trial. How are adults in that situation tried? That would work for kids as well. The entire sentencing apparatus for children should be strictly separate, though.

[Javaman]

12. Link please. nt

[Odin2005]

13. This whole thing is very sad.

:(

[stuntcat]

121. +1

There're too many stories of kids being raised by people who don't know what they're doing, growing up poor and sometimes abused horribly, then they kill someone. I don't know what to say about her punishment, but kids should have better lives growing up than some of the horror stories I've read. She's the natural product of neglect. What if she'd grown up some other way and turned out just fine? :(

[Orsino]

14. Charging a minor as an adult is an oxymoron.

The one concept precludes the other.

Charging a minor as an adult is simply a feel-good compromise taken to placate the get-tough fetishists. It is not a solution to anything concrete.

[Wash. state Desk Jet]

19. Hold out for hope ? Not so sure about that.

Is she a incurable psychopath? Professional opinions would no doubt very.
What if they reduced the voting age,how would that effect your opinion ?

Does holding out for hope replace the lines drawn in law?
Isn't murder the line?
Isn't it up to the court to prosecute to the full extent of law in murder cases?
And isn't it the responsibility of court to determine rather or not the crime is excusable because of mental defect ?

What is a gang related murder when the murderer is 14 or 15 ?

Where is the line drawn ?

Are they all to be excused ?

Is there no line to be drawn ?

Incarcerated there are no drugs other than those drugs prescribed by a court appointed doctor in the process of evaluation which will take time ,much of that actually.

Down the avenues of evaluation public opinion or yer opinion don't really matter at all.And ain't that the truth.

[Orsino]

33. Not sure what you mean, but one line is very clearly drawn...

...with the concept of a minor defined as being too young to be held fully responsible for offenses.

Charging the minor as an adult happens when we look at this concept and imagine that the child would be getting off too easily...and so we wave a magic wand to declare them suddenly responsible--after the offense. That's where it gets really stupid.

[Wash. state Desk Jet]

38. Sometimes holding out for hope can be more stupid than humane.

As an example look at the fact that there is no cure for child molesters.So the child molester is given the label of sex offender and than further given a number, level i,2.or 3-, 3 supposedly being the most likely to re offend and 1 supposedly being the least likely to re offend.

But in truth there is no difference.
Now you can except that or refuse to believe it.

But would you or can you ever really believe anything a psychopath says or pathological lier?

Well in fact you know that answer is no.

And so in yer view it could seem as though yer saying ,regardless to how bad that is, given the murderer's age we should hold out for hope. Too young to prosecute.

And I am not so sure about that.
You see it's this way, if there is no cure,than there is no cure . And until there is a cure ,there is no hope.

Mental defect is the defense case . The accused does not end up in Juvenal hall on this one.

[Orsino]

42. I can't accept that...

...as I didn't understand it. :shrug:

The "holding out for hope" reference, in particular, eludes me.

[H2O Man]

59. Respectfully disagree.

In my state, an 18-year old caught having sex with a 15-year old will often carry the label of "sex offender." I worked on a case where a kid who was 25 months older than the girl he had sex with was given a life sentence for this. His only prior offense was being among a group of kids caught with booze and pot.

I also worked on numerous cases of sex offenders who fit the description of a predator that deserved the label. There are distinct advantages to considering each case on an individual basis, rather than relying on labels.

In the case mentioned in the OP, it is possible the offender is indeed a sociopath. But such a diagnosis would depend upon much more than the act of murder. Most sociopaths are not killers. And attempting to label a 14-year old as such is generally a risky venture.

In the majority of legal cases, a mental illness (and sociopathy is not one) is not used as a defense. It can be used as a mitigating factor when a judge sentences a defendant. Likewise, the age of a defendant is also considered a factor in many cases, in terms of how a case is prosecuted, and how someone's sentence is determined.

[Wash. state Desk Jet]

102. There is a very separate category in the general sex offender label

That category is child molester. It seems to me you are looking at what you call statutory rape ,thats the old label.

Regarding the socio, you might take a look at how the F-B-I places the hard core child molester and the revenge motivated arsonist over thirty years of age in a very separate category of crimes .
Both types operate the same way which why those two types are in a very separate category of crime.The laws very from state to state regarding how this case will be tried.

We know that the sex offender label regarding first time youth offenders is far too far. And we know that needs to be fixed .

I was making reference to the low life repeat offender hard core child molester/predator.Rape turns to murder to cover up the rape,than murder becomes the big thrill.
Revenge motivated arsonist over thirty fallows a very similar rate of progression /or the same pattern.

[H2O Man]

105. You might want

to take an introductory course on the topic. I'm familiar enough with how the F.B.I. designates criminals (I have several relatives with experience there, including a now-retired uncle who wrote the book, so to speak). I'm also quite familiar with the approaches that various states take. I used to train police in this area.

[Wash. state Desk Jet]

108. Look even a masters degree in phychology

isn't enough to convince someone with 20 years or more working for the prison system in a professional standing that they are not animals ! Or that there are no animals in the prisons.

Who are you trying to fool with that ?

Who wrote or said anything about prosecuting a label ? If that is what you got out it, that is not what I said ,or wrote.

And it is indeed about murder is it not ?
And as far as I know in this country ,you are still innocent until proven guilty. If that tells you anything.

[H2O Man]

127. The OP was

indeed about killing; your posts wandered aimlessly into areas of sex crimes, sociopathy, and arson. I'd welcome any attempt on your part to focus on the topic from the OP, though.

[Wash. state Desk Jet]

128. I see where you are going with it.

The revenge motivated arsonist over 30 yrs. of age ,if you have ever looked into that type of crime,you know where any little thing can set them off. So murder by fire.
OK so the arsonist goes off about like that kid did with a gun. See the connection ? Time stands still for the revenge motivated arsonist about like it does for a con.The revenge motivated over 30 never really leaves age 15 mentality. That's odd.

The 14 year old could remain the same at 30, call that a socio,call that a phyco ,what ever label you put to it.
Evil is what it is.

The ah, more animal than human thing.
I don't know if the 14 year old in this case is beyond redemption , but I do know there is not a fix for every problem in this world.And that is why there must be a line drawn.

Blame it on drugs, blame it on a failed system ,? You know it comes down to rather or not she knows the difference between right and wrong.

I won't be sitting on the jury and neither will you be.And my humanity will not allow me to forget the victims.
Which means at some point all the excuses thin out than dissipate into thin air.


I'm done with this.

And I think it's up to the court to decide what punishment is appropriate . Never lose faith in the courts.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

20. +1000

Amen!!!

[Rebubula]

15. Another Latino killed in Balmor

Balmor (local dialect) is fast becoming the Detroit of the East Coast. Another day...another murder.

In the last month or so, 3 Latino men have been killed by black folk. The racial tension is getting thicker everyday. It seems as most people (and news outlets) ignore this violent racism displayed by blacks against Latinos since it is not as sexy as white on black racism. Just ask any inner city Latino about this if you do not believe me.

Racism is a world wide problem and has been since the beginning of recorded history - and it ain't just white and black. But, thanks to folks like George Wallace, it is always easier to play it with a Southern accent.





Oh...and she only killed the 1 guy. Both were shot, but only one died.

[Phil The Cat]

46. Have you ever been to Detroit?

Would you care to share what you know about Detroit? I've only lived here for about 40 years, drove taxis through the streets of the city, visited friends, went to concerts, shows, sporting events, etc. in the city! So my knowledge is far more limited than yours!

Maybe you would like to join the Freepers chorus in a rendition of "Bulldoze 'em all!"

(I'm sorry...I get cranky when I see even the progressives are on a non-stop uneducated slam of my hometown!)

[Rebubula]

56. Suck it up...

...have you ever been in a South Bashing thread??? Look for some of those and see how my region gets the shaft.

Either way...Detroit is the bastard child of the US and I was simply trying to make a point. Someone is always from somewhere. Perhaps your sensibilities would be less bothered if I had said Oakland. Of course, Oakland DU'ers would be out in force.



ON EDIT : http://www.examiner.com/crime-in-detroit/detroit-crime-roundup-top-5-stories-from-july-2010

Detroit may have some awesome features, but it earns its rep every year.

[LanternWaste]

99. And as it's always much easier to predicate

"Look for some of those and see how my region gets the shaft..."

And as it's always much easier to predicate our own actions and deeds based on those done to us rather than working from our own scale of ethics....

[geek tragedy]

16. Old enough to kill two adult men, dangerous enough

to be locked up.

Raise your hand if you want people like this living next to you.

[motely36]

21. No, I don't want her living next to me,

but I also don't think she should be tried as an adult.

She is a child. She probably belongs in a mental institution, not in jail.

[geek tragedy]

28. And then she magically gets better and is no longer

a violent person when she turns 18?

[motely36]

32. There is nothing magic about it

She should get the help she needs.

Charging her as an adult seems to me to be unfair as she is a 14 year old child.

[geek tragedy]

45. Society needs to be protected from people like this. nt

[readmoreoften]

73. Irrelevant. The question is: should she be charged as a juvenile?

Not "is she dangerous" or "do you want to live next to her."

[CakeGrrl]

76. Agree - she needs to be off the street one way or another.

I should be able to sit on my front stoop without being blown away by a random hothead who knows enough to obtain and use a gun.

She knew right from wrong well enough to know what she needed to do to get what she wanted.

I think a line is crossed when lives are taken with purpose. Those who do it should face the consequences of their actions.

[Upton]

17. Well, you can't just let her go..

while explaining away her crime with some extenuating circumstances BS. She was old enough to take a life, she's old enough to be held accountable.

[madinmaryland]

18. HERE IS A LINK...

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/baltimore-city/bs-md-ci-teen-girl-shooting-20100825,0,1841723.story

The two Honduran men sitting on the front steps of a Southeast Baltimore rowhouse couldn't help but chuckle at the sight of a 14-year-old girl clutching a silver revolver and demanding money.

But Arteesha Holt wasn't like most girls her age. A tomboy who liked playing football and basketball, relatives say she also had an explosive temper and was prone to uncontrollable outbursts.

Once, she destroyed her family's home, slinging an ashtray across the room, tearing pictures from the wall and kicking out a heating vent, all because her infant nephew stepped on a bowl of strawberries. The girl's mother says she tried repeatedly to get her daughter help through the juvenile justice system, to no avail.

..snip

Sad, just very sad.

[Blue_Tires]

124. Her relatives are a bunch of humanitarians as well

from the brother who hid the gun and later showed it off to this money quote from a cousin:


"She ain't no cold-blooded killer. She's a nice girl. But tough times — get hard. You gotta do what you gotta to do to survive out here. This is a dirty world."

[TreasonousBastard]

22. Her mother wanted help for her, but there was no help...

and now she is a killer. One man paid with his life, another with a hole in his head, and she will pay for the crime.

All because no one would pay for help when her mother begged for it.

[Bluerthanblue]

49. and our society is at fault as well-

we deny help for children who don't have connections or money, and when they do things like this, they don't have access to big money representation.

:shrug:

"what a world, what a world" we've created.

[ensho]

23. 14 isn't adult - she needs to be detoxed and then mentally assessed

before any charges. she is a child. perhaps man made hormones have given her large breasts and bleeding that makes her look adult womanly, I don't know but, her mind is 14.

[pitohui]

26. absolutely get her off the street forever

you and i knew when we were 5 or 6 years old that you don't kill people

someone who doesn't know that age 14 is beyond a sociopath, you say she killed two people forever dead to get money to buy drugs, if you're telling this correctly, well, that kind of person doesn't need to be walking around in the free world

drugs & alcohol are an addiction that 90% can't shake, i know many people who are substance abusers for whatever reason and who have suffered terrible stress who somehow go to work to get money to pay their own way, they don't kill people to get money to buy their fix

an addict needs a fix every single day, how many people would you like this conscience-less monster to kill?

two is two too many IMHO

i am a woman, a small woman, every violent offender set loose on society robs ME of my freedom

wow, on edit-- i thought this was someone the OP knew, now i see the link and see that this killer's OWN MOTHER begged to have her taken away because she was terrorizing the home, the authorities did nothing and let the kid have a free kill...this is a monster, folks, and the authorities who didn't act earlier, seems like there should be a way to at least get civil penalties against them, by allowing this "child" to walk free aga. the mother's own request and warnings, they helped set up the situation -- this person was DESTINED to kill, she was KNOWN to be dangerous

[Iggo]

29. If we draw the line at 18, then the line should be at 18.

And we do. So it should.

[Beetwasher]

30. She Was Almost Certainly Abused

I don't believe a 14 year old should go to jail, but she does need to be institutionalized in order to get the help she needs.

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

52. Yes, this is indeed very VERY fortunate.

:puke:

[old mark]

35. If she is in the juvie system she will be out in a few years, after living in a hellish

environment and certainly being sexually used by anyone with the desire and opportunity. She will probably never get any type of psychological help, MAYBE evaluation and drugs if she is fortunate. She will be released with nothing and start right in on what she was doing before.

The juvenile "justice" system in the US is generally medieval- Most kids come out worse than when they enter, some of them die before they get out.( A 20 year old was just beaten to death last week in NJ juvie prison.)

I don't believe she would have it worse in adult prison and she may even get somewhat better psych care on a special unit and maybe not get raped so much.

I worked with newly released (prisoner) addicts, addicted juveniles, county prisoners and psychiatric hospital patients. There are very few real programs for kids with these problems in the US.

She has very little chance to get any type of real help, but her chances seem better to me in prison than in juvie, at least in any that I know about.

mark

[Phil The Cat]

48. People who CAN and WILL work with violently disturbed people

And do is successfully are a treasure, and should be given every reward possible!

I admit it, I could not do it! I could never muster the patience and courage to deal with a young, violent person like that!

We need to find the people who CAN! And it's not just about book learning, so blindly throwing money is not the answer! Not everyone is qualified: VERY few of us on this rock are! Working with a fragile, troubled spirit isn't the same as giving an innoculation or bandaging a wound!

Oy! Where do you go with something like this case? Charge her as a juvinile, give her every bit of treatment humanly possible (which, for some, will NEVER be enough), and risk someone's life and health if she is released without being cured, or do we lock children away forever?

Sad choice either way!

[old mark]

91. Phil, in most states, juvenile facilities (prisons) are worse than those for adults.

The female committed to a juvenile facility has a nearly 100% chance of being raped, and many times it is by the staff rather than other inmates. Most states warehouse "juvenile offenders" in places where they will never see any type of therapy or efforts at rehabilitation. They will typically be beaten by staff and other inmates, and they will emerge in worse emotional conditionthan whenthey entered.

I am sure there are some exemplary juvenile institutions in the US, but I don't personally have knowledge of any.

Kids don't vote, don't have any money or political power, and here in PA, regulations protecting domestic animals are tougher than those protecting kids.

mark

[Edweird]

39. This isn't skipping school or shoplifting or a 'dust up' in the abandoned lot. This is murder.

Murder is a very adult crime.

[slackmaster]

41. Research has shown that childhood mass-murderers often become animal abusers later in life

[woo me with science]

44. LOL.

That's when DU will agree to fry her.

[Zorra]

40. By legal definition she is not an adult and therefore should not be

prosecuted as an adult.

That said, IMO, it is obvious that this girl has some very dangerous antisocial tendencies and should confined in an environment designed to alter or eliminate these antisocial tendencies as well as minimize the possibility of her harming other people. She should not be released from this type of environment unless it is absolutely clear that she is no longer a threat to the safety of other people.

From a social standpoint, the girl is obviously very damaged; she frivolously killed two innocent people. Sometimes damaged people can repair themselves. Sometimes they can't. If the girl can't prevent herself from harming others without imminent reasonable justification, she needs to be kept away from the general population, or she might rob and kill me, you, or our children so she can get the cash to go buy herself a pack of Winstons.

[Brickbat]

43. In general, no; specifically with this case, no, but it also sounds like she has some huge mental

problems.

[Codeine]

47. 14-year-olds are not children.

Our society infantilizes people in a ridiculous fashion.

[Bluerthanblue]

51. what is a child in your opinion?

??

I left home at 17, and while I survived, I was hardly prepared for what I was getting into.

A 14yr old isn't allowed to drive a car, vote, drink, get married, buy frickin cigarettes- yet, when they screw up then they should be subject to the same 'justice'????

I'm not saying what this girl did is ok- or even understandable, but she IS a child.

[devilgrrl]

64. Awesome! Guess that means that they're old enough to have sex with!!!!

:woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo:


:sarcasm:

[Dappleganger]

70. Are you a parent to a 14 yr. old?

I am parenting our third 14 yr old and can assure you that they are still very much children in bigger bodies. There are laws about legal age for adults for good reason.

[jpljr77]

53. She did the worst thing you could possibly do to another human being.

Whether to "Charge as an adult" is an arbitrary and almost philosophically masturbatory question.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

54. i think its pointless to have a difference between adults and underage

if whenever convenient, we charge children as adults.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

61. +1. Also, see #50.

Some people want to have their cake and eat it too.

[Uncle Joe]

57. I view this girl and her family as direct victims of the insane policy known as the "War on Drugs."

Turning what should be educational, public health and privacy/freedom issues in to criminal ones and thereby breaking up the most basic structure; of all societies, the family.

The girl should be charged as a minor, the two men killed by this girl are also victims of this ill-conceived asinine policy.

Thanks for the thread, Stinky.

[reorg]

58. I am willing to bet that everyone here who thinks it's fine

to "try her as an adult" would get hysterical and cry "but she's too young to consent!!!" if she had sex with some guy.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

62. See #50.

You can't have rights without responsibilities, AND you can't have responsibilities without rights.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

63. LOL. true that

[devilgrrl]

65. Totally!

eom

[Pavulon]

66. After she shot him in the face? with the corpse, unacceptable..

seriously she is fucked for life.

[Bluerthanblue]

82. or to be drafted- or vote- or any number of

things that most all 14yr olds aren't equiped to fully understand.

[Green_Lantern]

60. if she was just a normal innocent immature kid I could see

Not trying her as an adult because she doesn't have the mental capacity to truly form the criminal state of mind.

The girl in this case definitely seems to have the state of mind to formulate a murder plot knowing the shooting would get her into a gang.

http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/crime/blog/2010/08/young_female_murder_suspect_ca.html">Police have said the girl may have tried to rob two men on Linwood Avenue on Aug. 13 as part of a gang initiation. The victims were among three Latino men killed in recent weeks in a spate of crimes that has shaken the community in Southeast Baltimore.

I normally would agree to prosecute juveniles as juveniles...but not in cases where they reason out that shooting and killing someone has a material benefit to them.

As far as 14 year olds not being old enough to "consent to sex" but old enough to be charged as adults...it's apples to oranges.

14 year olds who have sex aren't prosecuted...adult men who prey on their lack of maturity are, the issue is the victimization of kids.

Trying a 14 year old as an adult is an issue of protecting society and proper method of punishment and rehabilitation of criminals.

[Dappleganger]

74. So to you it all depends on terrible the crime is whether she's charged as a child or an adult?

So is it some kind of a sliding scale of violence??

She is a child. Her body may look mature to you but in her brain she is underage and a kid. There are some pretty effed-up kids out there, unfortunately but they are still kids and belong in the juvenile system.

[Green_Lantern]

129. no It's not dependent on how bad the crime is

It has to do with their capacity to understand the ramifications of the crime they're committing.

This girl knew that by shooting someone she'd get into a gang. Her behavior wasn't childlike.

Actually in most states minors are automatically tried as adults on murder or gang related crimes.

If it wasn't cold blooded first degree murder I might see your point.

But you want her tried in juvenile court where she'll probably get out at 21 and it won't go on her record even though she shot a guy in the face.

Secondly she'll be put in a juvenile detention facility as a cold blooded murder with kids who've committed lesser crimes. That really puts them at risk.

At some point we have to have concern for people who don't shoot others.

[bobbolink]

67. Like all these cases, it depends. Do we want revenge, or do we want to reclaim a citizen?

[proteus_lives]

69. Do some people deserve to be reclaimed?

[bobbolink]

72. Conservatives would, and historically have, said NO.

[proteus_lives]

75. Well, there are no conservatives being asked.

Do some people deserve to be reclaimed after heinous crimes?

[bobbolink]

80. There are... quite a few here.

[proteus_lives]

84. To some people's.....pov.

[Bluerthanblue]

77. yes.

If not, then how are 'we' any different than those who don't value the rights of others?

It is certainly worth trying.

[bobbolink]

85. Thank you. The replies to my simple sentence shows the true makeup of DU now.

:cry:

:pals:

[Bluerthanblue]

96. not so sure that the responses

represent the true feelings of DU Bobbolink.

Just those who are passionate about their perspective.

I'm glad we share the same view- We need to keep speaking up, even when it seems nobody's listening.

"Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter" MLKjr

:hug:
~blu

[proteus_lives]

86. So we should have reclaimed McVeigh?

Inside of giving him the needle?

I think we respect their rights in not giving them exactly what they gave their victims.

[Bluerthanblue]

94. I was very much against the

killing of Tim McVeigh as a way of dealing with the killings he committed. If it is wrong to intentionally take the life of another human being, how does it somehow become 'right' when it's done under the mask of "government" and in the name of "justice"?

Our military helped teach McVeigh to kill. He was awarded the Bronze Star for his actions in the first Gulf War.

And NO, I am not attempting to justify what McVeigh did, or anything he stood for. But killing him in response to his violent, murderous actions changed nothing, except to increase the number of people who are killed by other human beings intentionally.

(edited for stupid grammar- :blush:)

[bobbolink]

98. It is so sad that in order to argue for a humane attitude, we have to keep asserting

that we don't approve of the violence that some have committed.

Remember the thread the other day about "The Other"?

We have so divorced ourselves from "The Other" that we are losing what was left of our own humanity.

:cry:

:hug:

[proteus_lives]

112. No.

"Our military helped teach McVeigh to kill. He was awarded the Bronze Star for his actions in the first Gulf War."

No, our military taught McVeigh how to be a soldier. He shit on every Army value he was taught with his actions.


"If it is wrong to intentionally take the life of another human being, how does it somehow become 'right' when it's done under the mask of "government" and in the name of "justice"?

Because there is a difference between execution and murder. Legally and morally.

"But killing him in response to his violent, murderous actions changed nothing"

I disagree. He paid for his crimes.

[tkmorris]

107. I'll say it. Yes, we should have

It's funny how some will automatically name the worst example they can think of, to force the person they are talking to into (they believe) defending the indefensible. Let me make myself clear. I am not defending McVeigh's actions in any way but I do believe that we should ALWAYS try to understand what made someone violate the social contract and try to correct it. McVeigh, Dahmer, Bundy, and the guy who stole the car from the Walmart parking lot. All of them.

Will we succeed? Certainly not in all cases, but we should definitely try. As of today we never really bother, even for those jailed for relatively trivial crimes. The threat of punishment is the only deterrent we bother with and clearly that approach isn't working. If nothing else we'd at least learn something about what drives people to do the things they do, and we could actually have a conversation about how to PREVENT crime, rather than simply reacting to it.

[Bluerthanblue]

110. +1!

well said.

[proteus_lives]

113. I disagree.

There are people in this world who are beyond redemption, who don't deserve it and will simply harm others if given the chance.

I've thought about the issue too and some people deserve to die for their crimes.

[mitchum]

79. I don't subscribe to any superstition that embraces notions like "redemption"...

so, I would have to say no.
mithcum the draconian

[proteus_lives]

87. Even those who do....

Might say redemption comes in the next life. After penance.

[Codeine]

81. She killed people. Ended their existence.

There is no need to reclaim her. She needs to be put somewhere that keeps her away from decent human beings who do not casually end the lives of others. My life and your life are precious things not to be snuffed out by another.

[proteus_lives]

90. +1

[Bluerthanblue]

95. and that justifies devaluing her life in return?

Shall we kill her or just treat her like something less than a human being?

What kind of a hellish hole lies at the bottom of this endless cycle? How well has throwing people away worked for humanity so far? Have we stopped the downward spiral in all the years humans have been excusing responding to violence with violence or 'punishment'???

[proteus_lives]

114. She devalued her life when she ended the life of a other.

Some deserve punishment.

I'm sorry but I shed no tears for rapists, murderers and violent felons unless given a damned good reason.

Why? Because everyone has a choice. And they chose poorly.

[proteus_lives]

68. Depends.

If she was aware of what she was doing, then yes, lock her up and destroy the key.

[readmoreoften]

71. If 14 year olds aren't children, why is it illegal for them to vote and have sex with adults?

Why would a 14 year old be too young to have sex with an 18 year old, too young to have a valid political opinion, but not too young to be charged as an adult for a crime.

Either abolish the idea of charging people as juveniles or be consistent.

[Lyric]

78. If she's too young to have any adult privileges

...for example, the privilege to fully consent to adult activities like sex and getting a tattoo, the privilege to vote, smoke, and gamble, the privilege of moving away if her living situation is abusive, neglectful, or otherwise intolerable...if she's "too young" for any of THOSE things, then she's damned well "too young" to be held accountable as an adult for her crimes.

Either 14 year olds DO have adult reasoning capabilities and judgement, or they DON'T. We can't have it both ways. It is the height of hypocrisy to claim that our precious younglings lack the "adult judgement" necessary to partake in the vices and privileges of adulthood, but also simultaneously possess fully-functional "adult judgement" when they commit crimes, and therefore should be held to an adult standard.

In my opinion? They're kids, and should be TREATED as kids. Their brains are simply not finished yet--they DON'T have our ability to judge right and wrong on a large social scale, and they DON'T understand mortality and other moral concepts the way that adults do. They simply don't have the life experience and brain development to truly comprehend the enormity of what it means to murder someone.

Try her as a juvenile. Give her a chance to learn better and change as she grows up.

That's my $0.02.

[Codeine]

83. Kids get a free pass to murder people?

She's a monster. She will never be "better." A shrug of the shoulders and "Meh, she's a kid - let it slide" is simply not an acceptable reaction.

[Hippo_Tron]

92. From where the hell did you derive "free pass"?

It means she should be tried and sentenced as a juvenile and presumably put into a prison for juveniles rather than adults. How is that a free pass?

[proteus_lives]

116. 4-6 years for murder?

Yeah, that's a free pass.

[Hippo_Tron]

130. Who said 4-6 years?

[Lyric]

93. Untrue. That is simply not what I said.

Juvie is no "free pass". In some places, it can be worse than grownup jail. The difference is that she gets a chance to NOT spend the rest of her life in prison--she gets a chance to learn better and reform herself. Did you know that murderers have THE lowest rate of recidivism, bar none, at 6.8%? The odds are that she WON'T do it again, at least statistically speaking.

http://newgon.com/wiki/Research:_Recidivism

I have a three-year-old nephew. If he picks up a knife and stabs his seven-year-old sister, but DOESN'T go to prison forever for it, does that mean he's getting a "free pass" to murder? Or does it mean that society recognizes that he is simply too young to be held accountable for his actions? Sure, three is a lot LESS accountable than fourteen...but then again, fourteen is a lot less accountable than adult, too. The principle is the same on both counts--that a child is not capable of adult reasoning and therefore not accountable on an adult level for his/her crimes. It's just a difference of degree of accountability. A three-year-old would probably face NO legal consequences, and that's all right and proper. A fourteen-year-old will certainly face SOME legal consequences--but should they be exactly the same ones that an adult would face? In my opinion, no.

As for her being a "monster"--that's your opinion, and I'd love to know how you came about developing it. Do you personally know the girl? Do you know the exact circumstances of her life? Every single trauma and blow that went into her development as a person? Since you're handing out blanket judgements, I expect that you must have some profound and detailed data to share with us. It's damned easy to sit there on your high horse and scream that the world is Black and White! It's a lot harder (and less popular) to admit that there are unclear areas and extenuating circumstances that make things a veritable rainbow of Grey. The one thing I *DO* know is that young teens are NOT intellectually, rationally, or morally-capable on an equivalent level with adults. If they are, then why are they forbidden to drink, have sex, vote, and move out whenever they please? Obviously society sees their judgement as inferior to that of an adult--so why would we punish them on the same level as an adult?

Children don't commit murder in a vacuum, just "because"--at least not unless they're gravely mentally ill, which would remove them from responsibility anyway. Obviously the adults who were responsible for her care were extremely deficient, possibly abusive, and certainly neglectful. For all you know, she grew up in an environment where violence was a normal part of everyday life, and thus never learned that violence is "wrong". If a child is raised from birth knowing nothing but beatings, starvation, thieving, drugs, and despair, if a child is never taught about common decency and the social contract, how is it right or fair to lock the kid up like an animal when he or she displays EXACTLY those awful behaviors that they've always thought were "normal"? How is it just or fair to refuse to even CONSIDER the idea that maybe if this child were TAUGHT better, that he or she might realize that those things are NOT normal, and change?

Call me a bleeding heart, but when children commit violence, I tend to look to the ADULTS who were supposed to be caring for the child rather than at the child herself. I lean toward giving children the benefit of the doubt and permitting them things like therapy, an opportunity to learn and reform, and a second chance. If you simply cannot survive without locking SOMEONE up for life, well, why not start investigating her parents to see what THEIR role in this was? They're the ones who made her what she is--and as we all know (Charlie Manson, anyone?) you don't actually have to COMMIT a murder in order to be held responsible for it. Let THEM be called to account for her actions. Hell, if that sort of thing were more common, maybe people would actually GIVE a damn about making sure their kids are raised properly.

:shrug:

[proteus_lives]

88. "Give her a chance to learn better"

Too bad the people she murdered won't get that chance.

[Bluerthanblue]

97. yes it is too bad that their lives are ended -

there is NOTHING that can be done to change that. Not killing this girl, not locking her away forever- nothing.

Our way of "justice" hasn't worked very well so far. Maybe we need to really examine what we are doing wrong.

:shrug:

[proteus_lives]

117. Nothing?

Yep, it's true. Can't bring them back.

But you can punish the people who killed them.

You not ignore free will and you can expect people to face the consequences of their actions.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

101. very well stated

[Gator_Matt]

104. Are you out of your mind? She was 14, not 4.

Good lord, we're talking about someone in high school. Stop pretending that we're dealing with a toddler. High schoolers know not to murder people, so stop shoveling this bull.

[lumberjack_jeff]

100. Boys and girls should be tried in juvenile court.

If her psychological problems pose a danger to the community, she should be involuntarily committed.

[Gator_Matt]

103. Murder isn't a rational choice, but that doesn't excuse the murderer

I wouldn't want this person on the streets, and neither would you. This person murdered without flinching. She should never see the light of day.

[Selatius]

115. If she cannot be reformed, she belongs in a mental institution to treat her, not a prison cell

If need be, she should be institutionalized for life if the doctors deem her unsafe.

[Zavulon]

118. I'd charge her as an adult.

Sorry, but there are only so many excuses I'm willing to consider when two lives are taken. The girl is a danger to society, regardless of how she got there. Her crime is as heinous as it gets and was committed to buy drugs? If she's jailed for life my sympathy will still be for the victims, not for her at all.

[Bluerthanblue]

119. Stinky, the report I read said she had a brother, and in the link

down thread it says:

<<<<<"Johnson said she ran a strict house, often creating tension between her and her rebellious daughter.

"In my house, there are rules," she said. "You have to clean up, can't cuss. A child has to be a child, like children should be."

Something was wrong with Holt, however, her mother said. Her rage often got bottled up, erupting with terrifying results. Though she was a good student, she began having trouble in the classroom. She was shifted from school to school and charged with disturbing the peace.

"Arteesha is … ," Johnson paused, searching for the right words. "Unstable.">>>>>>>>>>>


A good student that suddenly starts having trouble in the classroom? Being shifted from school to school- and home to home?

There is much more to this story than we know. IMO.

She's a child imo. If she cannot have the rights of an adult, she shouldn't have the responsibility. Not to say that if she is found guilty she should just be 'let go'. But she's a child.

:hi:

[Stinky The Clown]

123. Yes, my original post had some factual errors. But that doesn't change the essential story.

She has a brother who, it now seems, is or will be charged as an accessory after the fact for helping her hide the gun.

Also, only one man died. She shot two men but one has survived.

The essential facts/narrative, however, are correct: a troubled 14 year old kid is being changed as an adult.

And yes. She's a child.

[MannyGoldstein]

120. She should be charged as a 14 year old

with mental health issues who killed two people. She is what she is.

The notion that we wake up one day and are suddenly an adult, totally different from the day before (when we were a child) is silly.

[Blue_Tires]

122. I don't know Md. state law

But I'd hope there is some in-between option: Don't try her as an adult, but don't let her loose on her 18th birthday, either...

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

126. This is the correct answer. -nt

[Jennicut]

125. I have worked with troubled, abused and neglected kids near the age of 14.

I was really afraid some of them would grow up like this. Would I want them charged as adults? No, they were near adolescents. Their critical thinking skills were more limited as they were not adults. Plus, they were abused/neglected and that damaged them in so many ways. The kids that were molested tried to molest the other kids that were in the group home. We had to get them separate rooms. Why is anyone is surprised when 14 year olds do this after the way they are raised in situations like that girls? I have seen it, close up. 10 years later some of the kids I worked with grew up okay. Some of them are in jail.