Poll: 10 year old murders baby brother

[Womplord]

I agree with the posters in the news site. I mean, you pay a babysitter to watch your kids and she was obviously slacking off (even though thats not really enough for a criminal charge imo). Plus, the kid is only 9 years old and I think that 9 years is WAY too young to give them a charge for murder. I mean, the kid would already have learned her lesson after finding that her brother was dead, putting her in prison seems unnecessary and punishment for the sake of it. Maybe if she had a history of behavioural problems.

 

[Sarge034]

How many times as a teenager have you reflected back on your childhood and thought "man, I was stupid!".

I do this all the time. Funny thing though. Never once have I thought, "Man, I was stupid when I killed that guy." Why? Because my stupid actions never resulted in someone losing their life.

She needs counseling, not third degree murder charges. This was an accident.

I was six when my brother was born and I remember being explicitly told not to shake or drop the baby, but you know what? That didn't matter. I was already so cautious with the baby that I was on the verge of being too scared to pick him up. If a 9 year old it not smart enough to understand that than she has some type of mental retardation. If she did understand it was wrong but did it anyway then it is murder. No matter how young you are, if you do something you know is wrong and someone dies as a result you are responsible.

In fact, I believe anything a person does well up until his 20's is accidental. A child's mind is to feeble to discern when it has done something wrong.

I'm 20. (hypothetical situation) So if I walk into a public place and gun down X number of people you would consider it an accident? (hypothetical situation) Bullshit you would. I knew what I was doing was wrong, but I still did it. That is not an accident. Also, I just wanted you to know that I lold when I saw you considered anyone up to 20 as having a feeble child's mind. I lold soooo hard my feeble mind almost lost control of my bodily functions.

In fact, every single violent human behavior is due to negative influences during their early years.

O rilly? Then how do you explain the people that have had good upbringings but then went on to murder people? Chemical imbalances in a person's brain play a huge role in the development of a person's personality and disposition. Sometimes shit just aint right.


On the topic of the babysitter. Why the hell would she not let the boy's sister in the same room as him? It is not like the girl had a history of shaking the baby (I hope). Now I'm not saying the babysitter is innocent because he/she should have been close enough to hear the baby crying. All I'm saying is that there is nothing negligent about putting a 9 year old girl and her brother in a room alone. Maybe they were supposed to go to sleep or something.

 

[Vykrel]

its both their fault, i think. for one, 9 years old is too damn young to be left to take care of a baby. obviously, you wouldnt expect the kid to flip out and shake the baby to death, but you would probably expect her to flat out fail during an emergency or something.

but 9 years old IS old enough to know the difference between right and wrong when it comes to how you treat a baby. she knew what she was doing when she threw the baby. she may not have known it would have led to his death, but she sure as hell knew it would hurt him, which is probably what she wanted.

 

[Moromillas]

You have got to be kidding me.

A 9 year old child with no behavioral problems is not going to suddenly decide to kill her baby brother. The fact that both children were not being supervised shows negligence by the person who was supposed to be looking after them, the babysitter.

part of a babysitters job is feeding them, cleaning up after them, putting them to bed, and CARING for them. To do these things they are not always with the child and at some point a baby might get left alone in its crib while the sitter went about her job.

We don't know the time of the incident. Time could place the sitter doing one of her chores thinking both kids are asleep; thinking one is playing, the other napping, and her prepping lunch. We don't know these things so we need to withhold judgment.

We do know that the child had the opportunity to pick up the baby, unsupervised. That should not be happening, at all. You do not let a 9 year old child pick up a baby unsupervised, saying that you were preparing lunch is no excuse.

You are just being unreasonable. What if the children were both supposed to be asleep? Is the sitter supposed to stand in the hall and watch that they don't leave the room?

"We payed you do watch the kids and clean up after them why is there dirty dishes laying out?"

Sorry sir i had to keep constant eye on the 10 year old so she did not murder the baby.

Yes, you are supposed to know, exactly where they are and what they are doing. Lets say that child didn't know how to swim yet, and decided to go for a swim in the pool. If the child drowns in the pool while under your care, you can't use the excuse 'I didn't know she was over there' especially when the child shouldn't have access in the first place.

So if the sitter leaves for a moment and the child decides to do something stupid because "If I'm not being watched i should endanger my own life"; that person should go to jail for negligence? No that's bull shit. A sitter that turns her back for a moment and a child does somethign stupid is not deserving of jail time for negligence.

Frankly "last i checked 5 minutes ago she was in bed" seems like a damn good excuse for why you wouldn't expect a child to be murdering her baby brother. But you need to be watching over the kid constantly to make sure it doesn't happen or else you are a negligent parent/caregiver. Last i checked care giving involved more than just watching them to make sure they don't do stupid shit it and sometimes you need to take you eyes off of them for a moment and trust they wont go killing siblings or drowning themselves.

By the way; is it negligence if i turn my back on my cousin for a moment while hes at the table trusting he won't leave and he goes outside?

Is it negligence if when he goes to bed and i go sit on the couch he gets up and plays with his toys without my knowledge? I mean i clearly was not keeping an eagle eye on him at all fucking times to make sure he didn't do things he shouldn't.

If taking an eye off of a child for a moment and them moving in the following moments is negligence my parents need locked up, so do my grandmothers, my grandfathers, and my grandpa deserves the chair because he left me alone with a lawnmower blade for 20 seconds when he went to grab some gas from the shelf. I mean i could have cut off my arm or stabbed myself while he turned his back for 20 seconds.

Be reasonable man.

Going to bed; BUT WAIT! that would make me a negligent pet-owner as i am not watching the puppy. He could chew on a cable or move and i would be at fault for his foolishness!

That's not for me to decide. Depends. And, no. Hmm, maybe you do get that kids can't see around corners and need parents and guardians to do it for them, and are just trying to debate some obscure point, I really don't know.

 

[BrionJames]

The parents are mostly to blame. They should've informed their child of the danger of "overactive playing" with their child.

 

[Tourmeta]

10 year old is old enough to understand a lot of this if you're relatively stable.

 

[Gigano]

I'd hold that a 9 year old should be under the age of criminal liability. In regard to her, this is a case for the social system, not the criminal courts (although that of course require having a functional social system).

Charges against the babysitter seem fair enough. She had taken on a responsibility for the kids and neglected it.

 

[tigermilk]

"Other, explain". Other as I do not identify myself as qualified to pass judgement.

 

[Raye Gunn]

I think both are at fault, though the girl moreso. The sitter is at fault mostly for not seeking medical care for the baby, but the actual act of violence is on the girl, possibly the parents, though i have a hard time imagining any parents with a new baby that don't explain to their older children that babies are fragile and you must be gentle with them.

Some of the comments in this thread baffle me, people who think a child of 10 can't understand death or that hurting a baby is a bad thing. While true that we don't FINISH development of our personalities, morals etc. until we are 20ish, it's not a light switch being turned on, it's a gradual progression. At 10 the vast majority of children do know right from wrong, and know violence is definitely not ok, especially towards a baby.

That being said, this is hardly the first time a child has murdered someone. http://karisable.com/youngmurder.htm Whether that's due to bad parenting or mental/emotional disorders, or something else, I'm sure it varies. But one thing is clear, many of these children, when questioned after the fact, make it clear they knew it was wrong, they just did it anyway. Are they clinical psychopaths? Or acting out after abuse? Again, probably varies from instance to instance, but they certainly did know that what they were doing was wrong, they just didn't care for whatever reason. I don't think this excuses their actions, lots of people have bad upbringings and don't murder people. You don't let that slide, if they knew it was wrong but didn't care when they were 10, unless immediate and strong treatment is given, and constant, thorough supervision, they will likely do it again.

 

[Crazy_Dude]

I got a perfect example for this cant remember the original article though. A few years ago a German Shepard (dog) killed a baby. The dog was put down but they noticed something in his ear. The baby had shoved a pencil down the dogs ear upto the point it started bleeding I wasnt suprised at all that the dog killed the baby it was merely an act of self defence.

Now to the point the parents should have never let a full grown dog and a baby in the same room. The dog was put down for a completly normal instinctive reaction. How would you react if someoene shoved a pencil down your ear and you couldnt get away?

The parent should have been charged too because indirectly they caused this problem. German Shepards are fine with kids but you should never let a full grown dog alone with a child despite how friendly the dog is. The baby might accidently anger the dog as it was in this case.

Same here the Babysitter should have been charged too. Yes you can leave a 9 year old perfectly fine with a baby. But just in case there should always be a supervisor around. And in this case there was one but she didnt get charged for anything.

 

[moretimethansense]

Sereously, what the fuck is wrong with al the people claiming that ten yer olds don't understand death?
Of course they fucking do, most eight year olds do, as well as many six year olds!

This child must have had severe issues to have done this, but don't go excusing her on account of her age, honestly do any of you even remember your childhood?
We are not fucking retarded at that age people!

 

[Zorg Machine]

Even four year olds understand that they shouldn't do that. Sure, maybe they don't understand death but they understand when something is very fragile and have the sense to handle it gently.

My 7 year old cousin seems to be a mental giant since he is apparently years ahead of this girl in terms of mental capacity.

 

[AndyFromMonday]

I've got 30 fucking replies and after going through barely 10 I've noticed everyone uses the same tired old arguments over and over again. I appreciate your replies but I will not be replying back. I've made my argument and a lot of people misunderstood what I was trying to say, someone going as far as asking me if the babysitter told the 10 year old to kill the baby.

 

[holy_secret]

The things is that unless this girl is pure evil and incredibly intelligent, she's not aware of the consequences of her actions. How can you punish someone who doesn't understand the crime they did? It's like putting an adult retard in prison.

 

[Vanguard_Ex]

This is where law gets complicated. Surely if the girl cannot understand right from wrong, then it cannot be murder? Is it not more alone the lines of manslaughter? Morality and duty is a slippery slope, be careful.

 

[Adultism]

Well. Man this is jumping around alot...

I didn't really think about the effects of actions that I did when I was a child until I was 18. I did stupid things as a kid that I regret to this day. But still, I'm pretty sure that a normal child would NEVER shake a baby like that, and then, THROW it into the crib. Theres so unstable behavior there and she needs professional help.

I don't think anyone should be in trouble for this. The kid need help, Plus an elderly women was watching them. She probably didn't expect a child to shake her baby brother. Some of the things that happen in this world are silly.

 

[ChiryX]

Well its the girls fault, 10 year olds shouldnt be that stupid to begin with -.-

 

[Moora]

Pretty cute how so many people rush to the poor innocent child's defense. I knew enough at that age to not shake a baby, and I sure as hell understood the concept of dying. I think a lot of you have the age of ten confused with the age of five. It's probably wrong to charge the child, but do not think for a second that she is innocent.