http://blogs.westword.com/latestword/20 ... istory.phpNov. 4, 1992 -- Thomas ''T.J.'' White, 15, and Marcus Fernandez, 16, killed state Trooper Lyle Wohlers. White is sentenced to consecutive 16-year terms for accessory to murder. Fernandez is sentenced to life without parole. [/quote]
animal-friendly wrote:
A 16 year old is sentenced to life without parole? Gulag ....
Quote:
Maybe and maybe not. Anyone willing to kill an armed officer of the law has to be considered a threat to society unless some extraordinary circumstances exist.
animal-friendly wrote:
No Wayne. Killing an "armed" (?) officer .... Why do you highlight armed? It's no different than killing an unarmed person.
It is very much different to kill an armed person. An armed person has the ability to defend themsleves an unarmed person does not. This, there is more risk to attacking an armed person and shows a greater intent to harm.
Quote:
Already, society has been a threat to these children. As a child, considerations must be made.
Society has been a threat to them? They were threatened in what manner? When do the "considerations for a child" stop?
Quote:
Quote:
Is this crime a problem for you? Is a sentence of 2-3 years in a low security juvenille facility a good way to make sure these two do not kill an unarmed (next time) person?
This crime is a problem for everyone. At the age of 16 .... Would there be another murder?
Why make these assumptions?
There are probabilities from which we can make educated guesses at the future, as opposed to making assumptions as you seem to know so well. Young offenders tend to repeat more often partly due to the punishment being more lax. The repeat offense for murder/manslaughter after release from prison is generally <1%, but as you say one is too many.
Quote:
It would indicate a high probability given the age and if there were such a light punishment.
Quote:
Disagree.
How did this kid get here in the first place? How much is spent keeping him there vs. how much would be spent keeping hm out?
Quote:
You cannot "keep him out" only he can do that. You can try but that is all. If cost is such an issue the death penalty is a better option in this case.
Only he can do that? No. You missed. How did the kid get there in the first place?
I do not know any more than you do, but I do know only he can prevent himself from killing unless we imprison or execute him.
Quote:
Quote:
Oct. 31, 1993 -- Paul English, 14, shot and killed Carl Banks Jr., 18, in Park Hill, as he was shepherding a group of trick-or-treaters. He was sentenced to 48 years in prison.
A 4 year sentence for killing someone in front of a group of kids is sufficient?
A 48 year sentence for a 14 year old? ... is rather insufficient. Seriously?
Quote:
No. The 4 year sentance until he turned 18 is insufficient.
No. A 48 year sentence is cruel and unusual for someone sentenced at the age of 14.
Not for killing someone in front of a bunch of children.
Quote:
Is it either/or? If so, why?
Quote:
Yes, a juvenille court cannot impose any punishment passed the age of 18, thus the sentence limit. If you do not know what is involved how do you know it is wrong?
I know because a 14 year old sentenced to 48 years of imprisonment is wrong.
Considering the different formula for which parole is calculated it is unlikely that would be the case, but if it were what would a "right" sentence be for a 14 year old with no other information on the situation?
Quote:
Kind of simple really, unless you want to employ graphs and statistics and other kinds of mathematical manipulations and analysis to say that it isn't.
Make it simple for us and explain what would be "right" and why.
Quote:
How did this kid get there in the first place?
Quote:
He killed someone.
A 14 year old killed someone and is sentenced to 48 years in prison? How does a 14 year old get into this situation in the first place? I'll beat the horse if you like .....
You tell me. You say it is wrong with no evidence at all other than your belief. Your belief seems to be more important than anyone else's.
Quote:
How much would it cost to create social nets vs. the cost of 48 years of incarceration?
Quote:
Much, much, much more expensive.
In what terms?
Dollars, which would be the normal value of economical cost in that context.
Quote:
And that last query is only an economical one .... not as important as the cruel and unusual punishment of a child.
Quote:
Quote:
More cruel and unusual than for the families of the victims who have a loved one killed by a child who then is lightly punished?
So you agree that the justice is cruel and unusual?
No, just that your definition is a bit skewed.
Quote:
As for the bereaved families, about as much. So is that the solution? Is the solution to mete out vengeance? Punishment for dysfunction? I say YES for punishment and NO for throwing away the keys on a 14 year olds. We get vengeance fuddled with keeping people safe from re-offenders.
Show us the evidence the safety should not be compromised with lighter sentences. Wait, you cannot because that would requires some statistics which you seem to distrust.
Quote:
Quote:
Feb. 25, 1995 -- Raymond James Gone, 16, shot and killed Denver police officer Shawn Leinen. He was sentenced to life in prison without parole.
Killing an armed officer would not need more than a 2 year sentence to protect unarmed people the next time?
What .... second murder? Who says?
If one is imprisoned for two years for one murder there is little to cause anyone to believe there will not be another.
Quote:
Quote:
Probabilities. Killing an armed officer indicates a clear danger to future victims of other crimes. Dead witnesses and all.
Again the "armed" officer ..... as if being armed elevates his status as a human being and as if a teenager would actually take this into consideration.
Yes, it does as an officer has a better chance of shooting back and killing or injuring the attacker and the investigation of a officer being killed is more intensive as a result so the chance of being caught is greater.
Quote:
You are throwing around the weight of the law as the courts do, regardless of brain maturation, circumstances, etc. And as for probabilities, we could see those same probabilities before the first crime happened anyway.
What exactly ARE the circumstances being ignored? How mature was the perpetrator in this case compared to others of the same age who have not killed anyone?
Quote:
Quote:
That is what the jury decided after hearing the case and evidence by both sides. You just make one assumption.
Quote:
Sept. 28, 1996 -- Jennifer Tombs, 16, shot and killed her baby sitter Latanya Lavallais, 23. She was sentenced to life in prison.
A killing by a 16 year old would draw a 2 year sentence in juvenille court. Is that sufficient for the crime?
It may well be for one so young to begin with.
A jury who thinks like you .... ie: we must get vengeance against this child, would have, of course, come to that same conclusion.
How did this jury think? Who was on the jury?
Quote:
It is a result of a certain cultural conditioning that throws away the keys. You are subject to that conditioning.
Or conditioned to ignore crimes as you seem to wish to do.
Quote:
Quote:
I am sure the family of the sitter would agree .... as would the people in the neighborhood when she got out.
Uh-huh. There it is again, that need for retribution and punishment and vengeance.
You assume the people in the neighborhood would not fear their loved ones might also be killed in this case. Prevention is clearly ignored in your appraoch.
Quote:
It's a natural feeling but not so logical when considered further. I would hope, and maybe assume, that the family and neighborhood would wonder what the hell was going on in the life of the 16 year old.
Yes, the daughter of a minister probably had a hard life that required her to kill the daughter of a church member and family friend.
Quote:
Juvenille court may not be sufficient, but life in the adult system without parole? C'mon Wayne ..... there is a reason why the US prison system is scrutinized and critisized. Why does it bother you? What are you defending precisely?
Misrepresentations bother me. This is just another case.
Quote:
Life imprisonement? Did she have the possibility of parole?
Quote:
There is generally a possibility of parole.
And those teens who have been served life sentences without the possibility of parole?
The parole opportunity is generally at a much later date, but it is on a state by state and even time period by time period determination.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
If so, she may just start life anew. And she may have had a chance of contrtibuting .... and we may well have been the beneficiaries.
or not. The odds are not good for your position.
What do you base this on?
Shooting someone in the back of the head multiple times, cleaning up the mess, and hiding evidence in order to go to a party and hopefully get away with murder.
Quote:
How can you make such a statement?
By looking farther into the case than you seem to have done.
Quote:
Someone makes a dire mistake as a teenager and willl most likely, according to you, make another one so we should just lock them up for their entire life, without possibility of parole? Locked up at 16 and released at 60?
That or just stone them to death ..... that is the Biblical appraoch is it not?
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Nov. 15, 1996 -- Antonio Scott Farrell, 17, and Kevin Blankenship, 16, kidnapped Barbara Castor, 76, from a Brighton parking lot, tied her up and left her near abandoned dam near Strasburg. She died of exposure. They were sentenced to life sentences plus 56 years.
Killing an old woman by exposure would not need more than a 1-2 year sentence especially if the trial could not be finished before the juvenille court lost jurisdiction.
Vindicative! We all need to be vindicated. We want collective vengeance afterall.
We also want to protect the next little old lady they decide to kidnap.
Quote:
No Wayne. You are coming from a very vindicative and punitive place. You are concerned about the safety of the old lady .... or so you say. But if you were authentically concerned ..... you would be just as concerned about 14 year old being sentenced to 48 years of prison. Your voice does not ring true here. You are simply defending your position.
How would a shorter period of time ensure the safety of the old ladies exactly? I do not see your point. The only thing a shorter period would affect is the person who killed the first old lady.
Quote:
Quote:
Sept. 7, 1998 -- Alexander Pogosyan, 17, and friend Michael Martinez, 18, killed four teenagers and a mother in a Labor Day rampage. Martinez was later slain. Pogosyan was sentenced to five consecutive life terms without parole.
Five deaths and less than a year in jail is justice, right?
Wrong .... as giving life sentences to teen-agers, without posibility of parole, is also wrong.
Quote:
Then there is no right solution in your mind. The rest of us are left to use the solutions we have.
What do you mean by that?
Just what I said, there is no right solution being presented by you.
Quote:
I didn't say that there is no right solution in my mind.
Yet, your actions still leave no right solution presented.
Quote:
You are trying to give me words that are simply not mine.
No, I give words to your actions.
Quote:
The rest of us are left with very grave considerations Including the ever growing prison poulations in the US.
And in no other countries are there growing prison populations.
