Subscribe to Breaking NewsLawrence King Case Gets Worse
A judge ruled the 14 year old boy accused of killing Lawrence King can be tried as an adult. Brandon McInerney allegedly shot King as the child, who had told friends he was gay, was writing an assignment for his English class. The February crime occurred in a school in Oxnard, California, a state that has what’s called Proposition 21. Passed by California voters in 2000, this law gives state prosecutors more leeway on charging children 14 and older with adult crimes without having the permission of a judge. McInerney is charged with first-degree murder and a hate crime.
No one reading this site is looking to give McInerney a pass; however, what purpose is served charging the young with adult crimes? California gives death to those found guilty of first degree murder and I’m not sure the state wants to be known for executing a child.
Post Script: It’s clear I’m no legal scholar. As GI pointed out the Supreme Court abolished, in 2005, the death penatly for convicted murderers if the crime was done before they reached 18.
The article says, “California gives death to those found guilty of first degree murder and I’m not sure the state wants to be known for executing a child.”
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled recently neither a state nor the Federal government can execute someone who commits a crime when they are under 18. In this case the most he could get is life without the possibility of parole.
Sending a 14 year old to prison for life without the possibility of parole serves no useful real world purpose and should stay only in the realm of fantasies and TV shows.
Regardless of what the law says the mental development rate of children is not the same for each individual. The reduction in the legal age to try someone as an adult is a knee jerk reaction to horrendous crimes and is not made logically.
In my opinion the 26th amendment started this process of lowering the age of criminal responsibility. If someone can vote at 18, then they must be able to be criminal responsible several years in advance.
Fact is, though, the founding Fathers knew people mentally mature later in life and set an age after much thought. The 26th amendment is a valid reaction to drafting individuals into the armed services where they may lose their life.
Clearly someone who by law must involuntary risk their life deserves the right to have a say in the making and keeping of this law.
It is possible, the proper reaction was to raise the draft age to 21 and not lower the voting age. This way we would not be viewing a 14 year old child today as criminally responsible as an 18 or 21 year old.
I must say I was expecting the system to keep my spacing as paragraphs are important (as you miss the lead sentence, etc). I hope someone will view this situation as a problem (as I do) and fix it by keeping a person’s paragraph.
GI,
Thanks for the clarification about the punishment. Big error on my part. Will fix it.
Sincerely,
James
“Regardless of what the law says…” “…reduction in the legal age….not made logically.” “”Fact” is….the Founding Fathers [KNEW]…” etc….. The B. GI Moshier letter is packed full of emotionall based suppositions; emotionally made assertions. And I certainly support his right to be wrong. What happened to the more thoughtfully presented arguments made [on the same issue] over the last couple of days? Don’t erase them, as several contained logical thoughts. The blog isn’t any better: “…charging the young with adult crimes?” The crime of murder, as one example, is not pre-defined as “adult”; we have to wait until it is committed to set the definition. But here we are, verbally running around bumping into one another choked up with the “unfairness” of it all…. Let the law (”illogical”?–I don’t think so) run its course and convict the defendant if guilty. The purpose served?–well, we can run around bumping into each other when we get to that point…
“No one reading this site is looking to give McInerney a pass; however, what purpose is served charging the young with adult crimes?”
Lawrence King’s murder was premeditated. It was not a crime of passion in the sense that it was not made by a child who was unable to control an emotional outburst and then who made the wrong split-second decision that cost someone else’s life.
If the life of a human being is supposed to be important, then the penalties imposed by society for the deliberate taking of that life should be as severe as possible.
Brandon McInerney will have the opportunity to spend the rest of his life in prison.
Lawrence King however will never have any opportunity to live his life, in any way whatsoever. Is that “fair” to King?
It unfortunate that Brandon McInerney chose to throw his life away. He still however has the opportunity for personal redemption, to reform his character. But that does not mean that he should be let out from receiving a more than just punishment, given the nature of his crime.
I agree with Patrick…it is tempting to say why waste another life by putting this killer away. However, his life was already wasted by whoever brought him up harboring so much hate. Was it a parent (probably a gay-bashing father/closet case) or a church sermon where he learned to hate his class mate?
It is not our (societie’s) fault that Brandon’s promise of a happy life has ended, so let’s not feel guilty we have to put him away to keep him off the streets. What harm would he do harboring such hate and violence in his adult life? It is the fault of those that taught him this–they should harbor the guilt of wasting this life. We shouldn’t feel guilty, except perhaps for not going after his parents, too.
I have to agree. The planning (premeditation) of this murder makes it far more serious than an impetuous 14 year old making a poor decision in the heat of the moment. Let him plan his life in a 6×6 room for the next however many years.
The useful purpose a life sentence for McInerney will serve is keeping him from harming any other citizens with his hate-filled rage. Sure a life sentence for someone his age means a lot more years behind bars costing taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars, but these are years that Larry King will never see. Let us not forget who was the real victim of this crime. Sympathy for McInerney and his future behind bars is nothing short of an insult to the memory of Larry King and the pain and trauma his family is going through. How many Larry Kings, Matt Shepards and others must die before we begin to understand that this is motivated by pure hatred and prejudice taught to them by their parents and other “social” institutions? If the ultra-conservative religious fanatics had their way, they would be stoning us to death on sight. Not only should McInerney be tried for his actions, but his parents as well for fostering a mentality that some people are sub-human and therefore deserving of whatever violence one can inflict upon them. McInerney is fortunate indded that I am not deciding his fate. Child or not, he would be executed.
Tiger,
“Child or not, he would be executed.”
The mullahs in Iran say the same when they hang children accused of being gay.
Sincerely,
James
Big difference between sentencing someone to death for being gay as opposed to committing premeditated murder. Apples and oranges don’t compare.
He is not a child; children do not premeditated murder and children do not commit hate crimes, let alone do both. Children are forbidden to possess firearms, therefore, by the fact that he had gun, he proved himself to be an adult.
The system failed both boys in this case. Lawrence was not protected from his killer. Brandon was not proteted from his tormenter. He was harassed to the point of doing something, possibly the only thing he could think of to stop it. Was Larry killed because he was Gay or because of his sexual harrasment of Brandon? Children can be very cruel and I am sure Brandon was teased about this unwelcome affection. I am not sure it was hate of the little queer as much as it could have been the other students reactions. Brandon was not developed enough to know how to make it stop other than stopping the source. If I was Brandon’s lawyer I would be looking towards the insanity plea as I am most certain that it drove this poor boy insane.
James, how can you equate being a murderer with being gay? I am astonished. This kid is ruined for life, so execute him and save the lives of other innocents.
Your comments are inappropriate, and ill-informed. Apparently you read the “Newsweek” article and think you know everything there is to know about this case.
Do you have kids? Well, I do, and my children know that if they were to be “harassed” or bullied at school in any way, they are to go to the teacher or principal; there is no evidence that Brandon went to any adult for help. Saying that “poor” Brandon was being harassed and did not know any other way to stop it is absurd. IF Brandon is mentally or emotionally disturbed that is the fault of his loser druggie parents, not the child he murdered.
That was a reply to James Omaha. Not sure why it posted where it did.