11 Year Old Boy faces life sentence for Murder!

[Giordano]

Why are there two charges?

 

 

 

And why cover it with a blanket? It's not like she was awake and he had to hide it. Unless he thought it would be a decent silencer?

 

To collect the powder? I think that's what they "use" it for.

[Riku3220]

To everyone wondering about why he used the blanket, the blanket covers the flash and prevents gun powder from getting onto the shooter.

 

 

 

Why are there two charges?

 

The lady was pregnant for 9 months so it's safe to assume that the baby was about to be born in a week or so. At that stage it's not a fetus anymore, it's a baby waiting to come out.

[1_man_army]

I hate how some people here are driving the real subject away and blaming other things, thats EXACTLY what the lawyer wants to do. :wall:

 

 

 

It isn't a simple case considering we are dealing with a child here (two counting the unborn victim). The legal system has to deal with all contributing factors and not just pick and choose what they feel is important.

[AceBeam]

An 11 year old is not incapable of picking or forcing a lock, finding a key, finding a hiding spot, nor pulling up a chair to reach a high-up spot.

 

I've had access to a gun since I was 9. Yes, my parents did keep it in a case high on the wall. Yes, it was locked. Yes, I could get it out easily. Even if the parents did hide the gun, the kid might be able to get it. He WAS smart enough to use the blanket, right?

 

Stop blaming the [bleep]ing parents.

[Mr_Adam]

The parent should be charged AS WELL AS the kid. Just as much their fault for not locking up their guns, not teaching proper gun safety, not paying enough attention to their kids.

 

 

 

 

No. He shot the woman POINT BLANK in the back of the head. He's messed up. Simple. No amount of gun control was going to stop that child save a bomb-lock. It sounds like he wasn't being abused, so it's not like he had any retributional motivation.

 

 

 

I may be being impartial in supporting the death sentence of a small child, but there are billions of people in the world. 500 maybe know this person, and who's to say he won't kill them?

 

 

 

 

 

@ the second charge, yes, the baby was probably due soon. The woman was 9 months pregnant (which is probably how he shot her in the back of the head while she was asleep, assume she'd be sleeping up rather than on her side? I'm no pregnancy expert)

[Kriegsmier]

NO he was NOT smart enough to use a blanket. There is NO point to the blanket, people watch to much CSI.

 

 

 

Reading more into it. It appears it was a youth model 20 gauge that belonged to the boy. He shot her once at point blank range....which again rules out any use for the blanket because at that close its still going to put a distinctive marking on the victim. You ever seen what a shotgun can do to a solid object up close? Wtf is a blanket going to stop. Picked up from a movie.

 

 

 

11 year olds can't even generally grasp the concept of algebra or abstract thinking.

 

 

 

If you're not going to send an 11-year old into the juvenile system, there's no point in having one.

 

 

 

My honest opinion is Murder such as this, cold blooded by a rational thinking person is beyond the realms of the Juvi system. Not to mention, its written Pennsylvania law that anyone over 10 accused of murder is charged as an adult.

 

 

 

To everyone wondering about why he used the blanket, the blanket covers the flash and prevents gun powder from getting onto the shooter.

 

 

 

Which is still totally [developmentally delayed]ed, since the GSR (Gunshot Residue) can be picked up from the ejection port and the gasses coming out of the ejection port. So covering the bore doesn't do much other then well....just provide something for the gun to shoot through. Again, its just a movie tactic.

 

 

 

Say what you want, but i still blame the parent. Did he just let him keep the gun in his room? I agree the kid was messed up, but he had problems the parents failed to address. I'm not saying charge the parent with murder, but charge them with something, neglect?

[Da_Latios]

The boy allegedly covered a shotgun with a blanket and shot Houk in head while she was asleep, before running out of the house to catch the school bus.

 

I lol'd. After that, he still went to school?!

[Giordano]

I'm not saying charge the parent with murder, but charge them with something, neglect?

 

How about the loss of his future wife and his kid being sent to jail.

[Riku3220]

To everyone wondering about why he used the blanket, the blanket covers the flash and prevents gun powder from getting onto the shooter.

 

 

 

Which is still totally [developmentally delayed], since the GSR (Gunshot Residue) can be picked up from the ejection port and the gasses coming out of the ejection port. So covering the bore doesn't do much other then well....just provide something for the gun to shoot through. Again, its just a movie tactic.

 

Any decent sized blanket could completely cover a shotgun you know...

[baalboy5]

How the gun go off and not awake the Dad/sister/brother?

[Riku3220]

How the gun go off and not awake the Dad/sister/brother?

 

Dad was at work, sisters were at school.

[Lenticular_J]

Why are there two charges?

 

I don't really get it either. People claim it isn't a life for abortion cases, but do when it comes to murder. There needs to be a whole new area of the law for fetuses.

 

 

 

The kid's eleven. Not three. He knows what he's doing. You guys were probably in fourth or fifth grade at eleven. I remember I could do plenty then; I basically could do everything I did now. Immaturity clouded my judgment, though. And while it probably messed this kid up, and he might have had problems, he knew exactly what he was doing and that it would kill them both. Kid's starting out as a sociopath. Needs to go to jail, but also needs rehab, which they'll probably pile on.

 

 

 

I think the dad should get legally reprimanded and have his hunting licenses and and other weapons or permits of his revoked for some time, if not life. It feels somewhat unfair to place the blame on him, since I have a feeling there's nothing differently he could have done. Probably just revoked for a few years.

[Riku3220]

Why are there two charges?

 

I don't really get it either. People claim it isn't a life for abortion cases, but do when it comes to murder. There needs to be a whole new area of the law for fetuses.

 

When it's that close to a birth it should be considered murder.

[Madmanpur3]

11 year olds can't even generally grasp the concept of algebra or abstract thinking.

 

 

 

If you're not going to send an 11-year old into the juvenile system, there's no point in having one.

 

You don't need to know elgebra or abstract thinking to know that when you shoot someone with a shotgun point blank, they die. He knew he was getting rid of her, which was his intent.

 

 

 

The only thing he didn't know when looking at this whole situation, was how much trouble he'd get into as a result of his actions. So if he gets off the hook since he isn't educated enough about it, why don't people who are just plain stupid get off the hook?

[Madmanpur3]

Why are there two charges?

 

I don't really get it either. People claim it isn't a life for abortion cases, but do when it comes to murder. There needs to be a whole new area of the law for fetuses.

Find me one person who claims it isn't a life after 9 months. -.- You DO realize that abortions aren't performed when the woman is 9 months pregnant right?

[1_man_army]

11 year olds can't even generally grasp the concept of algebra or abstract thinking.

 

 

 

If you're not going to send an 11-year old into the juvenile system, there's no point in having one.

 

You don't need to know elgebra or abstract thinking to know that when you shoot someone with a shotgun point blank, they die. He knew he was getting rid of her, which was his intent.

 

 

 

The only thing he didn't know when looking at this whole situation, was how much trouble he'd get into as a result of his actions. So if he gets off the hook since he isn't educated enough about it, why don't people who are just plain stupid get off the hook?

 

 

 

He is a child. Children are impulsive and aren't don' have a full concept of responsibility otherwise there would be no age limitations on anything. However, children do commit crimes which is why there is a juvenile legal system. If you avoid this system by trying children adults then there is no point in having it. To compare this case to cases where stupid people commit crimes is ridiculous. However, people with learning difficulties are treated differently in the system as they also often don't grasp the concept of responsibility which is slightly more comparable to this case as even stupid (but otherwise "normal") people do grasp the concept.

 

 

 

Lenicular J - Nobody claims that a foetus a 9 months isn't a child, if it was much earlier in the pregnancy you could make that argument but not at 9 months

[Skull]

I'd say the kid should go to regular jail, just not general population. He's 11, it's not like he didn't understand what the gun did, he wanted to kill her. You don't put a person like that in with the kids who got arrested on drug charges, robbery or hell, even assault.

[Madmanpur3]

I say prove he didn't know the consequences of his actions (that the lady and her unborn child would die), then they can try him as a juvenile.

[AceBeam]

I say prove he didn't know the consequences of his actions (that the lady and her unborn child would die), then they can try him as a juvenile.

 

That'd be hard to prove, with all the shotgun to the back of the head and whatnot :P

[Lenticular_J]

Find me one person who claims it isn't a life after 9 months. -.- You DO realize that abortions aren't performed when the woman is 9 months pregnant right?

 

Oh, whoops. I read it as six. Disregard that part. Except the fetus law. I like that idea, because it should happen, just because it does get fuzzy when the third trimester starts. And just to be contrary, partial-birth abortions are a moderately popular way (I completely pulled that outta my [wagon], it probably isn't really popular at all). That's probably the only thing I could never stand involving abortions, I don't really like it in the first place, but a partial-birth is just sick.

 

 

 

Also, the kid knew what he was doing. Think back to fifth grade. Would you know that shooting someone in the back of the head would kill them? I do believe so.

[1_man_army]

I say prove he didn't know the consequences of his actions (that the lady and her unborn child would die), then they can try him as a juvenile.

 

 

 

You've got the whole legal system backwards, you are innocent until proven guilty. The burden of proof is on the prosecution to prove that he should be tried as an adult.

 

 

 

Edit - I found this article interesting http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0303-04.htm

[Madmanpur3]

I say prove he didn't know the consequences of his actions (that the lady and her unborn child would die), then they can try him as a juvenile.

 

 

 

You've got the whole legal system backwards, you are innocent until proven guilty. The burden of proof is on the prosecution to prove that he should be tried as an adult.

 

 

 

Edit - I found this article interesting http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0303-04.htm

So you're saying if they can prove that he knew he was killing them, he can be tried as an adult? Yeah, that whole shotgun to the back of the head seems like proof.

 

 

 

Edit - They could surely prove he knew he was killing the lady, but the unborn child would be a little tougher. So maybe drop it down to one charge instead of two.

[1_man_army]

I say prove he didn't know the consequences of his actions (that the lady and her unborn child would die), then they can try him as a juvenile.

 

 

 

You've got the whole legal system backwards, you are innocent until proven guilty. The burden of proof is on the prosecution to prove that he should be tried as an adult.

 

 

 

Edit - I found this article interesting http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0303-04.htm

So you're saying if they can prove that he knew he was killing them, he can be tried as an adult? Yeah, that whole shotgun to the back of the head seems like proof.

 

 

 

Edit - They could surely prove he knew he was killing the lady, but the unborn child would be a little tougher. So maybe drop it down to one charge instead of two.

 

 

 

While, yes that is the what will happen in practice (most likely) it isn't something I agree with. There is a difference between your concept of killing and death as a child and knowing the gravity of what it as an adult. Also as the article suggests, children are not competent enough to be able to aid their defence in an adult courtroom considering the atmosphere in a courtroom and the complex language used. That is why I don't believe any child (and definitely not one this young) should be tried as adults. There is a juvenile system in place for a reason, why have it if you just bypass it when it suits?

[Skull]

[hide=]

I say prove he didn't know the consequences of his actions (that the lady and her unborn child would die), then they can try him as a juvenile.

 

 

 

You've got the whole legal system backwards, you are innocent until proven guilty. The burden of proof is on the prosecution to prove that he should be tried as an adult.

 

 

 

Edit - I found this article interesting http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0303-04.htm

So you're saying if they can prove that he knew he was killing them, he can be tried as an adult? Yeah, that whole shotgun to the back of the head seems like proof.

 

 

 

Edit - They could surely prove he knew he was killing the lady, but the unborn child would be a little tougher. So maybe drop it down to one charge instead of two.

 

 

 

While, yes that is the what will happen in practice (most likely) it isn't something I agree with. There is a difference between your concept of killing and death as a child and knowing the gravity of what it as an adult. Also as the article suggests, children are not competent enough to be able to aid their defence in an adult courtroom considering the atmosphere in a courtroom and the complex language used. That is why I don't believe any child (and definitely not one this young) should be tried as adults. There is a juvenile system in place for a reason, why have it if you just bypass it when it suits?

[/hide]

 

I know for a fact that at 11 I understood that when you put a shotgun to the back of someone's head and pull the trigger, they die and they don't come back. Maybe at 8 that could pass as a valid defence, but I can't understand how at 11 that isn't understood.

[Rebdragon]

Is it just me or is the popularity of these kinds of stories based less on the actual interest of the story and more on peoples unwillingness to examine their own misgivings?I mean, a what's stealing some candy to this kid? In comparison to an eleven year old killing a pregnant women, I guess all of you are practically saints, right?

 

 

 

Look at any any developing country and you'll see that [cabbage] like this happens on a daily basis. Honestly, this has nothing to do with any of you, and nothing you say here is going to affect what happens to him at all. Why the hell do you care?