Arizona 8 Year Old Allegedly Murders Dad and Friend

[Cyrus]

How do you know?

Because the police did not provide any facts that said so.

 

[leopard]

You have too much confidence in the police.

 

[Cyrus]

You have too much confidence in the police.

What's that supposed to mean?

As of now, the media reports claim that the police stated:

The boy had gone to a neighbour's house and said he "believed that his father was dead", Apache County attorney Brad Carlyon said. Police later obtained a confession from the boy, Melnick said.

Whether or not he actually shot them is not factual yet.

 

[leopard]

Exactly. So you don't know that he didn't grab a gun and shot them.

 

[Cyrus]

Exactly. So you don't know that he didn't grab a gun and shot them.

Why do you insist on making unsupported claims. In this country, it's called innocent until proven guilty.

 

[leopard]

You're the one making unsupported claims because you claim to know that he didn't grab a gun and fire.

It doesn't matter what it's called. Fact is, the boy is either innocent of guilty, regardless of if he is proven guilty or not. Either he shot them dead or he didn't. It doesn't depend on what evidence the police provide.

We don't know if he's guilty or not. We cannot punish him yet, but he is the prime suspect.

 

[Cyrus]

It doesn't matter what it's called. Fact is, the boy is either innocent of guilty, regardless of if he is proven guilty or not. Either he shot them dead or he didn't. It doesn't depend on what evidence the police provide.

We don't know if he's guilty or not. We cannot punish him yet, but he is the prime suspect.

Yes, it does matter what it's called and it does matter what evidence the police provide. If he really did shoot them, his hands will test positive for gun powder residue. It's that simple. No residue means he never shot the gun.

I said he did not shoot them because there are no facts to support the claim that he did. If you want to make a claim you have to support it. The null hypothesis is that the event did not happen. If you are going to put forth an alternative hypothesis, you need to have facts. You do not have these facts to support your hypothesis.

This is why its so important to understand the concept of presumption of innocence.

 

[redargon]

If he told them "mommy told me to do it" everyone would believe him and the mom would get tried. And tell me honestly, what 8 kid doesn't lie when they get in trouble.

Also, if you teach an 8 year old to shoot, but don't teach him the consequences and life altering power that come with shooting weapons, then it's probably best you're not on the planet anymore anyway.

Either way if the kid is guilt or not, he won't be sentenced to death, he won't go to prison. At worst they may put him into some sort of juvy or house arrest. I agree with Cyrus, that waiting for actual factual evidence is the best solution until anyone is tried.

 

[OAQfirst]

He should be tried as an adult. We need to send a clear message to every eight year old child that might be planning to kill their parent!

Ahem.

 

[russ_watters]

Yeah, just a kid that premeditatedly and in cold blood gunned down two people. Just your average kid.

Not all children are on the same level.

I know not all children are on the same level. But the fact that he is 8 means either:

1. [If he did it] He will be treated as a juvenile and the confession will be tossed.
2. [If he didn't do it] He will be treated as a juvenile and the confession will be tossed.

There is no need for an insanity diagnosis/plea.

 

[Proton Soup]

a confession from an 8-yr-old is completely worthless. even adults will confess to crimes they didn't commit.

 

[Evo]

I know not all children are on the same level. But the fact that he is 8 means either:

1. [If he did it] He will be treated as a juvenile and the confession will be tossed.
2. [If he didn't do it] He will be treated as a juvenile and the confession will be tossed.

There is no need for an insanity diagnosis/plea.

He could be sentenced to years in a Juvenile facility, or a few months in a hospital. But he will probably be sentenced to a Juvenile facility, if he is tried and found guilty.

 

[physics girl phd]

http://www.readingwindow.org/Images/Jwhaun.jpg

There's no way a boy like the one's picture above are old enough to begin to understand what happened.

Hmmm... via our legal system the one on the top would have understand his actions, and the one on bottom wouldn't have.

 

[Art]

Bringing him to court in handcuffs was ridiculous and cruel

The boy appeared in handcuffs with some people in the audience crying as he entered.
snip
The boy initially denied involvement in the shooting that left the men with multiple gunshot wounds from a .22-calier rifle but later confessed, said Roy Melnick, St. Johns police chief

But defense attorney Benjamin Brewer said police overreached in questioning the boy without representation from a parent or attorney and did not advise him of his rights.

"They became very accusing early on in the interview," Brewer said. "Two officers with guns at their side, it's very scary for anybody, for sure an 8-year-old kid."

http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/us_world/Father-is-Buried-as-His-8-Year-old-Son.html

The police haven't managed to come up with a motive yet to substantiate the dodgy confession they obtained and so in the absence of a single fact to substantiate the allegation Police Chief Roy Melnick told reporters the boy may have been abused by the men, thus slandering the victims without so much as a shred of evidence. Any evidence such as there is points to the contrary with no record of abuse and no problems with the child in or out of school. It's small wonder Melnick left his last job in Ashland under a cloud given his propensity to run off at the mouth..

Given the circumstances of the initial interrogation and the subsequent treatment of this 8 year old the only sure fact of this case is St. Johns, Ariz needs a clear out in it's police department before they resort to water boarding to squeeze a motive out of him.

This is the sort of officialdom you would expect to hear about from a country like Iran or Yemen not the USA.

 

[tribdog]

Why do you insist on making unsupported claims. In this country, it's called innocent until proven guilty.

Actually, I tried telling this to a cop once as he was handcuffing me and he said, "No, its innocent until proven guilty, in a court of law." As in the only place where you are innocent until proven guilty was while you were in a courtroom. I tried arguing that it was innocent until the court proves you are guilty. he wouldn't budge though.

 

[BobG]

I know not all children are on the same level. But the fact that he is 8 means either:

1. [If he did it] He will be treated as a juvenile and the confession will be tossed.
2. [If he didn't do it] He will be treated as a juvenile and the confession will be tossed.

There is no need for an insanity diagnosis/plea.

I agree. The confession is meaningless. The case is going to depend on physical evidence.

The videotapes of parts of the confession really throw this into question regardless of the legal details (need for legal guardian being present, etc). In the middle of his confession he pops up with the question, "Shot who?" The confession will never be seen in court, but probably still shouldn't have been shown on TV if there's a chance this case will ever go to court.

Supposedly, the police had responded to calls about domestic violence in the home in the past, although they didn't have any idea how recently when asked by reporters. The boy knew how to use the gun. That's about the extent of the case as far as has been released to the public.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/11/08/national/main4586103.shtml

 

[leopard]

Yes, it does matter what it's called and it does matter what evidence the police provide.

I said he did not shoot them because there are no facts to support the claim that he did. If you want to make a claim you have to support it. The null hypothesis is that the event did not happen. If you are going to put forth an alternative hypothesis, you need to have facts. You do not have these facts to support your hypothesis.

This is why its so important to understand the concept of presumption of innocence.

So if it was called "Guilty until proven innocent", the boy would have been guilty even if he didn't kill?

You're the one making unsupported claims here. All I claim is that nobody knows except the boy himself. The null hypothesis is an hypothesis, not necessarily an accurate description of reality. Either he killed them or he didn't. There is no difference between a killer who is proven guilty and a killer who is not. They are both killers.

 

[tribdog]

One of the murder charges has just been dropped.

 

[tribdog]

Nobody knows why it was dropped. The boy's lawyer thinks if may be so that the state can bring it back up when the boy is a little older.

 

[Cyrus]

So if it was called "Guilty until proven innocent", the boy would have been guilty even if he didn't kill?

Legally, yes.

You're the one making unsupported claims here. All I claim is that nobody knows except the boy himself. The null hypothesis is an hypothesis, not necessarily an accurate description of reality. Either he killed them or he didn't. There is no difference between a killer who is proven guilty and a killer who is not. They are both killers.

I agree with your second sentence with the caveat of 'at this point in time'. The police will find out soon enough though. The point is, let's not all bandwagon against someone until there is some evidence.

 

[leopard]

Legally is another matter. I care about what is true. But I think we agree after all.

 

[OAQfirst]

Looks like it's over.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29284614

ST. JOHNS, Ariz. - A 9-year-old boy accused of methodically shooting his father and his father's roommate to death last fall pleaded guilty Thursday to one count of negligent homicide, settling the case that shocked the nation.

...

The boy has not yet been sentenced. He could be sent to the county juvenile system, which would keep him close to his relatives. Apache County Attorney Michael Whiting wants the boy to undergo extensive mental evaluations and treatment, an option allowed by the plea agreement.

 

[Gokul43201]

I wonder if someone maintains statistics of the demographic make-up of convicted felons by year. It sure seems like I'm hearing about a lot more murders committed by pre-teens than before, and I'd like to know if such a trend is real.

Here's the most recent one I came across:

WAMPUM, Pa. -- An 11-year-old boy is charged in the shooting death of a Lawrence County woman who was eight months pregnant with her third child.

http://www.wpxi.com/news/18760897/detail.html#-

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Are juvenile offenders getting younger? The American public often hears policymakers and justice practitioners assert that young people are committing crimes at younger and younger ages. Is this true? This analysis explores this question by examining data collected by law enforcement agencies across the country. It tracks juvenile crime patterns from 1980 through 2006 and finds that the age profile of juvenile offenders has not changed substantially in 25 years. Crime rates among children under age 13 have generally followed the same crime patterns exhibited among older youth. In a few offense categories, however, increases in preteen crime have outpaced increases among older juveniles, particularly sexual offenses, assaults, and weapons possession (not necessarily firearms). The fact that school authorities and family members often report these offenses suggests a possible hypothesis to explain increases in some preteen crimes: The juvenile justice system today may be dealing with child behavior problems that were once the responsibility of social welfare agencies, schools, and families.
http://www.issuelab.org/click/downl...rends_in_preteen_crime/ChapinHallDocument.pdf

http://www.issuelab.org/research/arresting_children_examining_recent_trends_in_preteen_crime

 

[Gokul43201]

Thanks for the reference, Ivan.