How do we justify imrisoning for life a 14 year old?

[Stinky The Clown]

There was a horrible case in this area. A 14 year olf girl and her 17 year old boyfriend killed the girl's father.

TO BE SURE, that was a horrible crime. The killers can not be allowed to go free.

The girl enticed the boy into doing the actual killing. Which was easy, as both were mentally and emotionally challenged. There was more time determining the mental states of each than was spent on their criminal trials.

Both were adjudged competent and both were charged as adults.

A 14 year old mentally and emotionally challenged child was adjudged an adult competent to participate in her defense against murder charges. The same was true for the 17 year old boy.

I don't know what the proper disposition of these two cases might be, but I absolutely do not think they should have been charged as adults.

[deathrind]

1. When it comes to crimes

Committed by people underage we seem to have a justice system that bases the determination of charging the person as an adult or as a child based on the crime commited.

I do not pretend to understand why this is.

[DemocraticWing]

2. Few people should be imprisoned for life in my opinion.

Yeah we can usually tell the real sickos that get off on causing harm to others, the Ted Bundys of the world and whoever. But most people that kill are mentally or emotionally challenged in some way, or got angry and did a really, really dumb horrible thing. This is why we have prisons: to help them see why they were wrong and get treatment and education to have a better life when they get out. This is how it works in many parts of Europe.

Nope, here we have a culture of "hang 'em high" even if we're not all that sure they did it. So instead we'll lock a 14 year old girl in a cold, concrete cell forever. Even if she got out in 30 years, the way we treat prisoners, she wouldn't have the help or resources than to engage in behavior that won't put her right back in there.

[aikoaiko]

3. Do you have a link to the story or the names of the accused so I can look it up?

Last edited Thu Jan 28, 2016, 11:24 AM - Edit history (1)

Supporting a life sentence really depends on the details of the crime and the context of the crime and lives of the people involved.

I can believe that there are some 14-17 year olds who are so cruel and calculating that a judge could reasonably believe it is in the interest of society to put them behind bars forever.

Life with the possibility of parole after 30 years might be merciful.

[Kelvin Mace]

4. As i have said before on this topic

The age of majority for all choices; sex, drinking, smoking, gun ownership, voting, marriage, driving, public office, contracts, military sevice, etc, should be the same age one can be tried as an adult. If you can be tried as an adult at 12, then you should get all other choices as well.

Correction: on military service I would raise the minimum age to 35 and institute a draft any time the military was deployed for combat. Conscription would be universal, with no exemptions for public office.

This would greatly reduce our appetite for war.

[brett_jv]

6. I've said the exact same thing ...

You can bet the sort of people who would clamor to throw the book at this 14 year old ... if they found out she had consensual sex with a 40 year old ... would similarly fall all over themselves to throw the book at the 40 year old saying 'It's Rape! She's FOURTEEN! She's just a CHILD! She cannot CONSENT to ANYTHING!'

Either people are children, in which case they are not allowed to decide certain things (sex, contracts), nor be held fully accountable (at least not enough to be tried as thought they're a fully-formed adult) for their actions ... or they are not. Having different 'age-limits' for all these different things, in some cases (like this) completely arbitrarily, doesn't make much sense to me.