Charging Children As Adults

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='catholicinsd' post='1066442' date='Sep 19 2006, 12:30 AM']
Anyway. Children aren't adults. The sould be tried in junenille courts.
[/quote]
High school students resent being called children, anyway. As far as I'm concerned, they're not. They are capable of nearly the same if not more than the average adult. The only real difference is that they have legal restrictions (which aren't inherent to the person) and they have hormonal issues (which are inherent to the person). The former shouldn't make a difference and the latter might, but I don't care what your hormones say, the little voice we call a conscience kicks in before you pummel someone (although maybe the first punch would be pure reaction, but not a whole beating) or rape someone (which generally requires some planning, I would think, and therefore can't be purely hormonal.

Conscience can be formed or deformed, but it's pretty obvious that both those things are wrong.

[Don John of Austria]

[quote name='Raphael' post='1066599' date='Sep 19 2006, 10:25 AM']
High school students resent being called children, anyway. As far as I'm concerned, they're not. They are capable of nearly the same if not more than the average adult. The only real difference is that they have legal restrictions (which aren't inherent to the person) and they have hormonal issues (which are inherent to the person). The former shouldn't make a difference and the latter might, but I don't care what your hormones say, the little voice we call a conscience kicks in before you pummel someone (although maybe the first punch would be pure reaction, but not a whole beating) or rape someone (which generally requires some planning, I would think, and therefore can't be purely hormonal.

Conscience can be formed or deformed, but it's pretty obvious that both those things are wrong.
[/quote]
\

I don't know Raphael a beating doesn't take long, I can see pounding on someone for 45 seconds or a minute on pure reaction, it depends what they did. I would wager I could " beat" somebody in under 10 seconds, and I assure you that I could do all that "on reaction" and I am 33 not 17. That said, depending on what the other guy did he might have been justified in beating the snot out of him. Of course he might just be a bully.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='Don John of Austria' post='1066605' date='Sep 19 2006, 11:31 AM']
\

I don't know Raphael a beating doesn't take long, I can see pounding on someone for 45 seconds or a minute on pure reaction, it depends what they did. I would wager I could " beat" somebody in under 10 seconds, and I assure you that I could do all that "on reaction" and I am 33 not 17. That said, depending on what the other guy did he might have been justified in beating the snot out of him. Of course he might just be a bully.
[/quote]
Well, I suppose you might know better than I. I'm a pretty levelheaded person and I've never even been in a fight, except with my two brothers. I just think my reason would kick in before that.

[Don John of Austria]

[quote name='Raphael' post='1066606' date='Sep 19 2006, 10:35 AM']
Well, I suppose you might know better than I. I'm a pretty levelheaded person and I've never even been in a fight, except with my two brothers. I just think my reason would kick in before that.


[/quote]


Back in highschool I was in no less than 20 fights ( I sat down and counted once, it was between 20 and 35 depending on what one might concider a fight)--- and I was at a highschool Seminary. Now realize we lived with each other 24/7 and slept with our class in a giant barracks style room, so tension was expected, fighting was not concidered that big a deal and I think on the whole they viewed it correctly. Fighting is not that big a deal, beating someone is. That is why I said it is relevent what precipitated the incident.

By the way I would define beating as continuing to strike after the other guy is clearly defeated.

Edited September 19, 2006 by Don John of Austria

[Sojourner]

I covered a case several years ago that involved a 10 year old boy who shot and killed his father. The basic facts of the case as we first heard them were that the boy retrieved a .357 out of his father’s gun cabinet, called his father into the room, then shot him once in the heart. Dad fell over dead.

Prosecutors went back and forth about charging the boy as an adult (10 is the minimum age in Indiana at which a child can be waived into adult court on murder charges).

As the investigation progressed, information surfaced that the father had been abusive to the boy and the boy’s mother for some time, and despite evidence of the abuse (the boy showed up to school with marks in his foot from being stabbed with a fork) school and other officials had done nothing. The boy saw the killing as the only way to stop what was going on in his family. He was not in the end charged as an adult; instead he got sent to a juvenile treatment/detention facility where he’ll be until he’s 18 (or maybe 21, I can’t remember which). I believe this was the right decision in this case.

However, I know this was a decision that weighed heavily on all parties involved in the case. It was a very, very serious crime, but there were extenuating circumstances that mitigated the boy’s responsibility. The hope is that he will be rehabilitated and will grow up to be a productive member of society. I pray that’s what happens for this boy.

While this was the right decision in this case, it is not the right decision in every case. Sometimes it is appropriate that a child be waived up to adult court. When an adult’s reasoning process is used to make a decision to commit a crime, I think it is entirely appropriate to do so. When a child’s reasoning process is used, then the case should remain in juvenile court.

Part of the consideration also should be how the case would be disposed. I know that was a consideration for prosecutors in the case I covered … just imagine a waifish 10-year-old boy being stuck in an adult prison. In this case, clearly not appropriate. But again, in some cases it would be entirely appropriate to charge a kid as an adult.

However such a decision is going to be very case-specific, and typically it’s going to be based on far more information than you will ever see published in a newspaper article. I wouldn’t feel comfortable forming an opinion based on the scant information CNSD has provided here.

[Lil Red]

well said, sojourner

[Norseman82]

[quote name='catholicinsd' post='1066589' date='Sep 19 2006, 10:10 AM']
He only spent 2 days in the hospital. His attacker, who is 17, should charged as he is: a juvenille.[/quote]

Are you kidding me? Kid, do you realize how callous you sound? 2 days is 2 days too much. Please get a grip on reality.

If at 17 this punk cannot determine the gravity of putting someone in the hospital, then that is even more reason to get him off the street.

And I also want to find out what the freshman did to get him this type of beating. I will allow you to enlighten us if there is a self-defense factor involved here. Then I will echo what Don John said about him not being charged. Until then, please rethink your "blame the victim" Berkely California la-la liberal psychobabble.

[Don John of Austria]

[quote name='Norseman82' post='1066669' date='Sep 19 2006, 12:56 PM']
Are you kidding me? Kid, do you realize how callous you sound? 2 days is 2 days too much. Please get a grip on reality.

If at 17 this punk cannot determine the gravity of putting someone in the hospital, then that is even more reason to get him off the street.

And I also want to find out what the freshman did to get him this type of beating. I will allow you to enlighten us if there is a self-defense factor involved here. Then I will echo what Don John said about him not being charged. Until then, please rethink your "blame the victim" Berkely California la-la liberal psychobabble.
[/quote]


I would go with self-defense or defense of another, perhaps, depending even defense of an ideal. But what started it is a very important thing to know.

[ardillacid]

[quote name='catholicinsd' post='1066596' date='Sep 19 2006, 10:23 AM']
He pummeled a freshy for half a minute.
[/quote]
By what catholicinsd says, it sounds like typical bullying of the freshman crowd

[catholicinsd]

[quote name='notardillacid' post='1066707' date='Sep 19 2006, 01:36 PM']
By what catholicinsd says, it sounds like typical bullying of the freshman crowd
[/quote]

It was, just more intense.

[IcePrincessKRS]

You said the victim wasn't totally innocent. The question remains, what did the freshy do to get himself beat up?

[Don John of Austria]

[quote name='catholicinsd' post='1066753' date='Sep 19 2006, 02:46 PM']
It was, just more intense.
[/quote]


Ah so he is a bully, who hospitialized someone weaker than himself. I think a public flogging is probably more appropriate than jail time, but since we live in a society which is obsessed with serving time that does seem appropriate.

[ardillacid]

I think someone should beat him until he is hospitalized for 2 days

[catholicinsd]

[quote name='notardillacid' post='1066857' date='Sep 19 2006, 04:15 PM']
I think someone should beat him until he is hospitalized for 2 days
[/quote]

I think my school polic officer should be in trouble. The attack happen within about 10 feet of his office.

[avemaria40]

[quote name='homeschoolmom' post='1066549' date='Sep 19 2006, 08:26 AM']
So that gives people free license to inflict pain and suffering on innocent victims? Sorry, not buying.
[/quote]
I agree. I have friends and a sister who are freshmen and if anyone pummeled them, I would go into the offensive to defend them. I don't care what kind of situation it is, it doesn't change how people should treat each other

Edited September 19, 2006 by avemaria40