Posts
Sandra Parshall
Earlier this month, an eight-year-old boy in St. Johns, Arizona, was charged as an adult with two counts of premeditated murder after telling police that he shot his father and a male lodger in the family home. He was taken to court in handcuffs for his initial appearance before a judge.
This rare case has attracted media coverage throughout the US, and in Canada and Europe. The brutal murder of a child is an unfortunately common occurrence, and although society is almost universally repelled by such an act -- even hardened prisoners look on child-killers with contempt -- no one is surprised that it happens. But a brutal murder supposedly committed by a child is unusual and shocking, something that simply doesn't happen in a normal world. Some people will tune it out, not wanting to discuss it or think about it. Others will gather as much information as they can, making a thoughtful effort to understand what happened and where blame, if any, should be placed. Still others will apply the same biases with which they view all offenders, refusing to admit any difference between a child and an adult.
The comment boards on internet news sites are filled with posts about the Arizona case from people who know next to nothing about the boy and his family. The judge wisely imposed a gag order on everyone involved, and the few bits of information that came out before the order provide little basis for an assumption of either guilt or innocence. Nevertheless, a lot of people have strong opinions and are eager to share them with the world.
On one site, an Ohio resident’s impassioned plea for help for “this confused and terrified 8-year-old child” is followed by a terse recommendation from a New Jerseyite: “Drop the kid in a Saddam hole. Seal it up. Walk away.”
Many people who have commented on the case are aghast that an eight-year-old knew how to use a gun. The two men were reportedly shot, multiple times each, with a .22 single-action rifle. The shooter had to chamber a round every time the gun was fired. The father was an avid hunter and had taught his small son to use a rifle, but the horrifying image of a little boy deliberately chambering and firing each round is too much for some people to accept. “There is more to this than meets the eye,” a Michigan woman wrote. “Someone else (an adult) had to have done this deed and pinned it on the 8-year-old.”
If the boy shot the men, as he told police he did during intense and aggressive questioning, what explains his behavior? Talk of abuse as a motive began immediately after the shootings. What else could drive a young child to such extreme action? If it turns out the boy was never abused, what are we to think then? Is this well-behaved boy who has never been in trouble before really a bad seed? If he is proved guilty, will we ever know for certain why he picked up a gun and shot his father and a family friend?
Arizona’s criminal laws allow a child this young to be charged and tried as an adult if the prosecutor can convince a judge the defendant is beyond rehabilitation in the juvenile justice system and is competent to understand the charges and assist in his defense. Currently the boy is undergoing a psychiatric evaluation to determine his competence. If he’s declared incompetent to assist in his defense, and the prosecutor still wants to try him as an adult, he can be placed in a psychiatric facility until he becomes competent.
Whatever happens to him, the future doesn’t look promising for the youngest murder defendant in the US. We can speculate about the cause of the murders, but until the whole story comes out we can’t draw any lessons from this tragedy. The aftermath – what happens once a child this young is arrested and charged with premeditated murder – is what we should be thinking about.
Where should he be held until trial? Should he be released in his mother's custody or kept in a cell? If he's convicted, what punishment is suitable for an eight-year-old double murderer? A man from Pennsylvania gave his answer on the internet: “They should seek the death penalty. If they don’t, life in prison, a dark cell, with no light. No human contact, silence.” For good measure, this gentleman added, “And castrate him too.” Others believe the boy needs treatment, not punishment.
What do you think should be done with a child who is charged with murder? Should he be tried an adult? If he’s convicted, where do we put him, and for how long? If he’s ever to be released and live in society again, what can be done to prepare him for that day?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
Very interesting post, Sandy.
Remembering how my boys were at that age, I have a hard time believing that this boy really and truly knew what he was doing. Sure, young children know guns kill, but at eight years old, they haven't quite grasped the concept that death is permanent.
It will be interesting to see how the case develops.
Sandra,
I was shocked by this, too, and depressed at the thought that it could have really happened the way that they say it did.
An eight-year-old who murders is not like an adult who murders--I agree with Joyce. If in fact the boy committed the crime, I think that he needs psychiatric care and perhaps detention. It would be valuable to get to the bottom of this child's motives, not only to determine if he was abused, but to find out if a child is really capable of that sort of thing, and is wily and deceptive as they paint him to be.
Does a child have the psychological depth to create an alibi? To live with the forced authenticity of an extended lie?
My first though was that the boy may have been an abused child. What we do know is that we don't know enough to decide what to do.
Whatever happened and whatever the reasons the solution isn't simple. One of the reasons I like writing: I can make things work out any way I want them to.
A snippet from the police interrogation of the boy was shown on TV last night, and it was appalling. The boy had no advocate in the room -- no parent, no attorney -- and the cop was badgering him, saying things like "You killed your father, didn't you?" The boy kept saying, "I don't know!" After an hour, he "confessed".
I don't care what he's been accused of doing, I don't care whether he's actually guilty. This child is eight years old, and he should be treated accordingly. What will the state of Arizona do if he's convicted? Put him in prison with grown men?
We need some federal laws to protect juvenile offenders.
How can his "confession" even be admissible if the boy was badgered into it? Where I used to work, juveniles were never questioned without a parent present, or in the case of older juveniles (16, 17) with a parents' permission.
Can you imagine what would happen if they put the poor kid in prison with adults?
If the boy's attorney gets the confession thrown out because his rights were violated (he wasn't given the Miranda warning), the prosecutor may not have much of a case.
Facinating and upsetting case. I've been watching to see what happens.
I believe that the premeditated acts and the victims have been completely dismissed in this case, simply because of the age of this defendant. Children of a very young age are capable of doing atrocious violent acts. This is another confirmation of that.
I have seen so many make excuses for this kid as if to say he should have no accountability and be patted on the head and consoled instead.
Since when does society protect the ones who are the takers of life and throw the actual victims under the bus? I find most of the comments on the web appalling. Even talks of gifts being sent to this boy. Rewarding him for the most despicable behavior imaginable.
Also some seem to want to make him incapable of shooting 10 shots with a single bolt action rifle. That just shows me how so many don't have a clue, how easy or quickly this can be done. It is a simple mechanism and can be done even by a seven year old.
I cling to the hope that justice will be done for Mr. Romans and Mr. Romero, who lost their lives in the most inhumane way, as the murderer lay in wait to kill them both, with them never even knowing that they were in grave danger from the enemy within.
Post a Comment