15 year old kills 9 year old neighbor, charged as adult

[psychowatcher]

We are assessing this legally, and legally, she is still a child. Legally she is as responsible for that act as my fictional nine-year-old.

We need to judge on the basis of the law. If they change the law, and say fifteen-year-olds are adults and/or as responsible for their actions as one, then I wouldn't be arguing.

Also, it's a slippery slope until you start condemning thirteen-year-olds, after all, they are only two years younger. What about ten-year-olds, or nine-year-olds?

Nobody was saying that fifteen year olds are adults. They are saying this individual fifteen year old committed a crime that is on par with an adult crime and, thus, needs to be treated in the appropriate manner. Or did I miss the part where all your delusions occurred in reality?

So, why not take the cases on a person-by-person basis? Y'know, assess the mental maturity of the individual and decide whether or not s/he is competent enough to stand as an adult. Or does that not fly in your black and white world?

Your fictional nine year old needs to be assessed based on the situation.

And don't pull that 'but we generalize for everything else lol she shouldn't be tried as an adult' bull on me. Murder is an issue that deals with the loss of life. Every other murder case is taken based on the evidence. There's a difference between first and second degree murder and manslaughter. Should we just try everyone who takes a life, whether it be due to carelessness or intent, with first degree murder? That's clearly what you're saying, what with all children needing to be tried as children no matter the crime.

I would be worried if there were a group of competent individuals that had immunity no matter what the crime. It would make retribution for gang beatings and school shootings quite sad.

A woman once executed her two sons because they had developed Parkinson's and were going to suffer greatly. She felt it in their best interest for their lives to end. The woman simply got assisted suicide charges. She is a double-murderer. Cases need to be taken based on the situation. That's why the mentally retarded won't get the same sentence as a competent person could.

The girl decided that she was more human and had more of a right to exist than another person. She was more human than those of us who do not kill. She will be tried as an adult because the DA gathered the information readily available and decided on her mental state.

It's a slippery slope when you start making a generation of people immune to justice.

You know what, I think I made a mistake with the slippery slope argument, I'll admit that.

And you know what? I agree with you, this woman is a psychopath.

But the law is absolute(I'm not) and it says that she is a child until she is eighteen. I think they should throw her under the jail, except for the fact that they are trying her as an adult, when she is legally a child.

If they changed the law to say that anyone that is fifteen or older should be tried as an adult for intentional pre-meditated murder, then I would be fine with that. The fact is, they are messing with the law. She is legally a child, yet they try her as an adult. It's just a little troubling to see such inconsistencies in the law.

I don't know if that made sense or not, I'm really tired.

Okay, I'm just going to make one comment here. Trying a minor as an adult on the basis of their crime is nothing new. It's happened before. Legally she's a child, but she committed a crime that was far beyond what the juvenile system usually would be covering. Hence, being tried as an adult.

As for inconsistencies in the law, those are everywhere. The only analogy that comes to mind is like at school (since I need to be there in a few hours). Doing something bad gets a punishment. The worse thing you do, the harsher the punishment. Do something really bad and the police get involved. In this case, Juvenile court wasn't suited for this case, so they went to the normal court system. Nothing new.

you're forgetting these laws were written in a time when children were innocent, dinner was on the table when you got home and colored folk had their own school to go to
when times change ideas and boundries have to follow. This includes laws about children and murder

What PuppetMaster said.

 

[PuppetMaster]

...eat up resources

And I thought a society's worth was measured by how it treats its worst.

I don't need to shovel food into a volcano for 8 years before I figure out it's a waste, especially after lots of people have tried it already. We live in a world where the worst rule the system and decide how they're going to be treated by the caring. In an idyllic world; the worst would be treated fairly and swiftly, a child wouldn't be wondering what it's like to kill a little girl when someone who just did is being pulled apart by wild horses instead of trotting off for a 10 year time out

I have to agree with PuppetMaster. Given the way things are set up, people have a shocking tendency to get off with rather light punishments, most of them completely undeserved. I'm not jaded to the point of saying "Just kill everyone," but there are cases in which, looking at the evidence, the amount of brutality, the callousness of the criminal, and other factors my compassion can't convince me that mercy is in order. This case would be one of them. The depression excuse is what really gets to me. I've suffered depression (actually on medication for it now). It isn't fun, but depressed though I was, I've never decided to go through with killing anyone. I won't deny I haven't though of it, but I knew better. This girl obviously knew she'd get in trouble for killing the little girl. Otherwise, why would she have hidden the body? She should be charged as an adult (which she was) and should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. It probably won't happen, knowing how volatile the American justice system is, but I'm hoping that the Bible Belt won't let this slide...

I wouldn't hold my breath and wait for the religious folk to face a problem head on. It'll probably be Maryln Manson's fault she did it, or Hannah Montana or some such crap. BUT! if several concerned citizens demand to know her identity at all times, regardless of witness protection or whatever they have, then it could be made impossible for her to live peacefully

 

[OmegaXIII]

No fucking teens have depression. Don't even start.

Amen to that with one small edit, a very small minority of 'depressed' teens have true depression, but like ADD a fuckton of kids are diagnosed because apparently a large population of doctors have got their heads so far up their asses they just throw Prozac at anyone who so much as looks at them funny.

So apparently if she were to go to a minors rehab unit she would be out by 21, which equates to 6 years for premeditated murder. She knew what she was doing and thus she should have planned for what the consequences would be, justice should have no mercy on her just because she is a few years below 'adult'

Would be interesting to see if opinions would differ if it was a 15 year old thug guy though circa the two little 11 y.o. shits on trial in the UK for torturing kids.

 

[Skeleon]

*snip*

Well, I disagree. It's less a problem of the inmates themselves than it is a problem of the circumstances.
Overcrowded prisons lead to violence and uprisings. Under proper instruction (as well as control, obviously) these types of workshops function quite well. If anything, it reduces prison violence because people got stuff to do and can work instead of constantly brooding.
I think you're underestimating the results of these programs. Proper reintegration does reduce reoccurance of crime quite a bit. The real problem is that few prisons really work towards helping to reintegrate the inmates and just kick them out the door when their term is served with no lesson learned whatsoever.

Furthermore, I also think you're overestimating the leniency of psychiatric evaluators because of a few stories you read about it.
But whatever, we stated our positions and I doubt either one will convince the other.

 

[psychowatcher]

...eat up resources

And I thought a society's worth was measured by how it treats its worst.

I don't need to shovel food into a volcano for 8 years before I figure out it's a waste, especially after lots of people have tried it already. We live in a world where the worst rule the system and decide how they're going to be treated by the caring. In an idyllic world; the worst would be treated fairly and swiftly, a child wouldn't be wondering what it's like to kill a little girl when someone who just did is being pulled apart by wild horses instead of trotting off for a 10 year time out

I have to agree with PuppetMaster. Given the way things are set up, people have a shocking tendency to get off with rather light punishments, most of them completely undeserved. I'm not jaded to the point of saying "Just kill everyone," but there are cases in which, looking at the evidence, the amount of brutality, the callousness of the criminal, and other factors my compassion can't convince me that mercy is in order. This case would be one of them. The depression excuse is what really gets to me. I've suffered depression (actually on medication for it now). It isn't fun, but depressed though I was, I've never decided to go through with killing anyone. I won't deny I haven't though of it, but I knew better. This girl obviously knew she'd get in trouble for killing the little girl. Otherwise, why would she have hidden the body? She should be charged as an adult (which she was) and should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. It probably won't happen, knowing how volatile the American justice system is, but I'm hoping that the Bible Belt won't let this slide...

I wouldn't hold my breath and wait for the religious folk to face a problem head on. It'll probably be Maryln Manson's fault she did it, or Hannah Montana or some such crap. BUT! if several concerned citizens demand to know her identity at all times, regardless of witness protection or whatever they have, then it could be made impossible for her to live peacefully

Have to agree with the religion thing. As soon as I heard about it, I started wondering what they'd blame for her actions. But when discussing things like this, a typical response in my area (which is in said Belt) would be "Fry em."

I highly doubt that Witness Protection would be involved. The most she would probably be able to do is change her name and move away. That's what the guy who killed Dominick Dunne's daughter did. And if she manages to slip away, pray for a nosy mother-in-law. The kind who investigates any potential daughter-in-law... My, that conjures up a mental image...

 

[Sad Robot]

that's entirely possible. I simply assumed you thought it was shallow or narrow minded of me to declare the plight and situation of a human being a waste of time and energy
if I'm wrong, elaborate

Let me get this straight: you consider a society decent, fair and ethical if it were to have its underaged criminals... pulled apart by wild horses?

that's me overexadurating.
what I literally mean is if I see, over the course of my life, 50-60 people run across 6 lanes of traffic and not get hit I might think it possible, even practical to do. If everyone I ever seen try to do it was graphicly splattered across the pavement I'd consider 45 seconds at the crosswalk a worthwhile investment.

make examples out of the guilty to detour others

Yes, because that works so well. They have capital punishment in the USA and I think the last time they had a murder over there was in the 1970s.

Hyperbole aside, I don't know what the statistics are on how well deterring works but certainly I agree people shouldn't "get away with murder" (even though they do all the time) but should get a punishment of some kind. But not because of petty vengeance, never for vengeance. It never helps anyone.

Rehabilitate and if that's not possible then, I think, for serial offenders and people clearly beyond help, life (and "life" isn't life, so perhaps consecutive sentences in the most extreme cases) in prison or other appropriate institution depending on the case. They keep the serial offender off the streets and perhaps help to deter in some cases. But if there's any doubt whether it's helpful at all to prison someone then I'd be inclined to give the person the benefit of doubt.

Fortunately, I'm not in the position to make these decisions. I'm just glad that in my country we still have some sensible people in the justice department, despite the masses often crying, in knee jerk reactions, for harsher punishments. "What if it was my child?" Well, that's entirely beside the point. I don't believe the justice system is there to satisfy the victims' and their next of kin's bloodthirst. It's there to protect people and if a conviction doesn't do that then it's pointless.

And I don't think any amount of warnings will change a psychopaths mind. Unjust things happen all the time but we are no better if we answer violence with violence.

Or am I the last person on the internet who believes criminals should be treated like human beings?

 

[Zersy]

Yup. She should be trialed as a adult.

Plus ! The fact that she was gonna do it is not something to ignore.

 

[KiKiweaky]

Persoanally I think she should burn and if it was me handing down the sentence she'd burn brightly. But the most we can hope for is that she spends the rest of her days locked up in either jail or a psychiatric hospital.

 

[psychowatcher]

Or am I the last person on the internet who believes criminals should be treated like human beings?

Not sure. With me, it's a case by case basis. Some deserve some time, others deserve life, and still others deserve death. I tried finding something to convince myself that this girl deserves mercy under the law, but could find little. My compassion lies with the victim first. A brutally murdered little 9-year-old girl.

Naturally, people say, "The little girl is dead. She doesn't need your compassion. Her murderer does." But I don't buy into that. If that makes me a backwards, eye-for-an-eye hick, then that's what I am. But if you know something is wrong and you do it anyway, then let the punishment fit the crime. If you brutally murder someone, live with it in prison for the rest of your life.

 

[Chrissyluky]

She definitely deserves whatever is coming to her. you don't take the life of another child simply to experience it.

 

[SweetNess_666]

She should be tried as a adult she should go to jail and rot that poor little girl she killed is"nt even going to see her teenage years now cause of that twisted *****! If she goes to juve it will probably be cushy as hell she wont come out a changed person she should never be allowed to see the light of day again if you ask me! and depression....fuck that i have a freind who used to cut herself quite badly but she didn't want to kill other people its bollox

 

[Bernzz]

Okay, that's pretty fucked right there. Premeditated and everything, I think she deserves to be tried as an adult. I'm 17 in two months, but even at fifteen I knew that murder was fucking wrong.

 

[Sparcrypt]

I would lose no sleep to see her trialed as an adult. I'd also be fine if she was given the death penalty. The reason for this is that she took the life of another.. especially a child.. a freaking 9 year old girl for gods sake. I don't believe she deserves to walk this earth. Thats just me.

BUT... though I discount them and basically dont care, the following still have to be considered by a judge..

1. She's obviously very disturbed. The reasons she gave for it were VERY disturbing, I doubt she is in a very good state of mind.
2. Anyone who thinks that 15 year olds don't do stupid things they regret later in life clearly doesnt remember being a 15 year old. Granted 'kill someone' shouldn't be one of them but saying she is a responsible adult is not what people are saying. What they are saying is 'she will get a more harsh penalty if she is tried as an adult, lets do that!'

Honestly.. put up any of the following questions to your average person:

Man kills 2 people, 10 years in jail or life?
Woman smothers child, 10 years or life?
School shooting claims 8, life or the death penalty?

Most people would pick life life and death because THOSE ARE BAD PEOPLE. Personally I'd pick the same.. we'd all probably be wrong though. Tis why I'm glad it's not me who decides.

 

[Sparcrypt]

If she goes to juve it will probably be cushy as hell

I get you think it's bad but that is a retarded statement. Thinking juvenile detention centres are 'cushy' is a biiiig mistake. Clearly you haven't had enough exposure to the kind of people who end up there, for which you should be thankful.

Hell I remember a TV show a few years back where they sent a few trouble makers to JD for a couple weeks so they could get a taste of what they were in for if they didn't sort themselves out.... they went in with the 'yea we tough, we can take it!' They left swearing to god they'd do anything to never go back.

 

[Sad Robot]

Most people would pick life life and death because THOSE ARE BAD PEOPLE. Personally I'd pick the same.. we'd all probably be wrong though. Tis why I'm glad it's not me who decides.

Yeah, and I too tend to sigh in relief that it's someone else's problem. But the truth is, if you live in a democracy, the blood is on your hands too.

 

[Sparcrypt]

Yeah, and I too tend to sigh in relief that it's someone else's problem. But the truth is, if you live in a democracy, the blood is on your hands too.

That doesnt really bother me.. for better or worse, I'm for the very hard punishments. I do however recognise that's probably not the best idea to have things actually work like that and am thus glad I'm not the one deciding.. if I was, you would see a very sharp increase in the amount of people in prison and on death row.

 

[Sad Robot]

Yeah, and I too tend to sigh in relief that it's someone else's problem. But the truth is, if you live in a democracy, the blood is on your hands too.

That doesnt really bother me.. for better or worse, I'm for the very hard punishments. I do however recognise that's probably not the best idea to have things actually work like that and am thus glad I'm not the one deciding.. if I was, you would see a very sharp increase in the amount of people in prison and on death row.

Well, I'm no saint myself, if someone killed someone I cared about and I had the chance I might perhaps do something irrational and stupid. Which is why I'm glad the system isn't based on knee-jerk reactions and the emotional satisfaction of the bloodthirsty.

 

[Radelaide]

It's not the fact she's 15, it's the fact the murder was premeditated. She killed someone because she wanted to know what it felt like. It wasn't a random act. She planned it for a week, dug graves and was opportunistic. All the signs of an adult act.

 

[Stitches242]

Gas chamber. No exception.

Tempting but I'd rather let the inmates rip her apart, child killers are loathed big time in there.

Not so much child killers but more so child rapists. I think this girl deserves to be tried as an adult, she wants to commit an "adult" crime, she can be tried as an adult.

IF shes not in a jail by the time the trial ends, let her get lost in a Mental Hospital, I've seen kids in there as young as 8; not for murder but maybe she could just be declared insane and thrown in the quiet room.

 

[Neesa]

As a Psych major (and watching tons of Criminal Minds), this is definitely the making of a possible killer. Lacking emotions for others (possibly due to the medication) and a chemical imbalance because of the depression is not a good combo at all. Also, children get the capability of understanding what's wrong or right at around the age of 3ish, but they still do things that are considered "wrong" due to lack of maturity. By the age of 10 or so, children are instilled with morals from their parents. They can understand what's "right and wrong". So for her to say that she doesn't "comprehend" her actions due to her age alone is completely null and void. However, given her current state of mind, her judgement could've been clouded tremendously.

Therefore, she really needs to be taken away from society. For her to say that she wanted to know what it felt like, seems like she wanted to know how it felt to take a life in her own hands. Something like strangulation is seen as a "personal" attack because it's close quarters. She felt the way it was to take life away in her own hands. If she had just strangled her, I don't think the sentence would be THAT bad. But she stabbed her and slit her throat... THEN buried the body in a wooded area? C'mon. She probably snapped back into reality after she committed the murder, now realizing, "Oh shit." Funny thing is, sociopaths and psychopaths do have the emotional capability of feeling remorse. Maybe her burying the body was the way to cover it up as well as show remorse for her actions. But she had the graves set for herself and another person. She had to have some sort of comprehension on what she was about to do. She's 15, not emotionally retarded. After all the things we see on TV, video games, movies, internet, etc., there's clear indicators as what happens to people that commit crimes. Was she put away in a box or something to not experience what life is? To not know what happens to "bad" people?

Premeditated actions should not be taken lightly at all. But in her current mindset, she was probably obsessing over it. Maybe wrestling with her conscious for a week contemplating if she should really go through with her plans. Logic went out the window when she decided to go through with it. Some people just need the taste of killing once for it to be in their minds. Wanting that rush and sense of power to hold someone's lives in your hands over and over again. It's quite possible that she might want to know how it feels again and again. Then the justice system would've let a serial killer on the loose.

What really gets me was the age difference. Why did she go after someone that was 9 and not someone her age? Maybe because she had the child's trust in her hands? She wouldn't have known her life was in danger because they were neighbors. The 9-year old might've talked to this girl, seen her in passing tons of times. So, Bustamante could've easily used her trust against her to lead the little girl out of her comfort zone (home). It's not like this was some random killing. She planned this. However, it doesn't matter if the victim was 9 or 19, murder is murder. If we let ever minor walk off the a minimal sentence, they'd continue to do it. They'd think it'd be okay since their age protects them. Hiding behind the fact you are a minor is a clear indication she knew of what she was doing.

As the old saying goes, "If you can't do the time, don't do the crime."