14 year-old receives life in prison without possibility of parole.

[Sabretooth]

And a lethal injection... well that would have been too merciful, i mean no one is really going to suffer from the injection. Its just a sting and a bye bye.

I don't see why we need to make criminals suffer during death sentences when they are eventually going to die any way. Capital punishment is exercised to rid society of that individual. If he is getting out of the way, I don't think we need to take an eye for an eye.

 

On a similar note, I find it difficult to call life imprisonment a proper punishment (not just in this case, but in any scenario). The reason is, by permanently locking up an individual in prison, you isolate him from society. On the society's side, that's equivalent to execution. On the criminal's side, his life is pretty much over regardless. Sure he'll "live to regret" and "suffer" and all that, but it all eventually ends up as sustaining criminals for ethics' sake. They could be dead now and a lot of tax money could be saved.

 

Possibly off-topic post, and potential for spiralling into capital punishment/life imprisonment thread.

[Darth Avlectus]

Well there is an issue with overcrowded prisons vs. the death penalty. The cost of capital punishment... in terms of dollars is WAY too high to make sense on a massive scale. That is a flaw in the justice system and not my first solution to deal with life sentence without parole.

 

There are other, cheaper, humane methods that are quick and painless. Also, what are we paying executors so damn much for? It's not like they're squeamish and suffer emotional trauma every time they execute someone or else they wouldn't take the job.

 

When you have inmates working, they have incentive to cut their sentence for each day they provide community service. When you condemn someone to life in prison without any hope of parole, you might as well pay the millions to legally execute someone because they would forever be a weight on the economy. Those who have some incentive to work would be able to pay for themselves at the very least through what they generate, but those who have nothing to gain wouldn't have reason to do this.

Conceded partially, but I should like to point out that's only the lighter side of things. To keep it short: prisons who do not rehabilitate effectively and only care about income for holding quotas.

 

However my attitude pretty much is, yeah, if they are a weight on society with no hopes or chances of bettering, get rid of them. Be done with it

 

I guess my main issue is the severity of the sentence for murder essentially condemning a teen long before he even became an adult. If serial killers can manage to get the possibility for parole, then why not Lotts? If Lotts doesn't get that option, then why would older serial killers have much more hope of rehabilitation?

 

The system is ****ed up. Double standards, maybe.

 

A side note: I wish I could take those cloaks and oak hammers away from judges who let sick people walk who shouldn't...maybe "judge" them back with a nice hard konk on the head while I'm at it.

 

The younger ones do have more potential to change than older ones. I'll agree there. Still, the kid knew what he was doing. It was wrong, even in outrage. I'd of course take everything into consideration that I possibly could before judging him.

 

You do realize that people who are "mortified" after killing, show genuine remose for their crime, get lighter sentences(unless you pre-plan a killing spree of say, a dozen people, then remorse won't get you anywhere).

Not to any great effect that would relatively matter anyway.

 

The problem with community service is the "community" part. You can't exactly trust a criminal, who is probably rather diseased, around the food supply, you can't trust rapists around women, pedophiles around children, murderers around people in general. That's the whole point of prison, to isolate people from the society that they harmed, and punish them for their actions.

Sums up my thoughts and pretty much was the conclusion I came to in general. Certain things, there is no, and should be no, compromise. There is just no rehabilitating people who just won't change. Certain things, there is no other answer but to punish.

 

As to this case, it is unusual in its circumstances, so certain exceptions could perhaps be made, but not lightly by any stretch whatsoever. I know I am still rather skeptical since the kid KNEW what he was doing, and the intent could be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. To take a life in general is no easy decision.

 

Also there is some meat to the idea that many judges who try kids unfairly give them harsh sentences, from petty crime to murder, they receive disproportionate sentencing, this however, is often the fault of the judge, not the system, or perhaps the prosecutor.

Or fanatical lunatics disguised as such people.

 

Also, slightly off topic since you were getting at the severity of punishments, If a little kid touches you inappropriately, you get charged. IF you just sit outside a room that your friends are robbing, you get tried for it, and if you just walk away without saying anything, its assumed that you are giving consent to it.

WEIRD!!

 

Yes, and I'm afraid that goes into territory with a whole mess of plotting on maybes, unknowns, and other stuff that is basically hearsay without any solid evidence. A vehichle by which many an injustice could be carried out. You do raise a good point for another thread. Feel free if you'd so desire to make one.

 

My caveat to punishment for taking the life of another would be: exception in the case of defense. Defense of self or another proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

 

I think this case is another prime example of a situation in which the courts, judges and prison services will simply be unable to win. They invoke the wrath of various groups for keeping this person in prison for life without parole, yet it is almost a certainty that if a convicted murderer was to be released, and should kill again, they would all still be criticised for releasing him - 'rehabilitated' or not. There will always be that strain between Victims groups and Prisoners groups.

Ah, How fundamental: a no-win situation. Also begs the question of society and testing its will for seeing true justice served VERSUS just satisfying its passions and prejudices. Just something for everyone to think about.

 

Concerning your emphasis upon "data" and citing media as a source for it: I'd agree it's not kosher. It's a rather ugly sibling to real research but what the two do have in common is that they do, in thesis, take a side of an issue, support it, and argue it. Since most general populace won't be bothered with nitty-gritty details anyway, media is so successful on convenience and ease of availability, as opposed to rigor and merit seen of real research.

 

@ Sabretooth: you do raise a good point and shine light on yet another issue: correctional ethics vs correctional economics.

 

Possibly off-topic post, and potential for spiralling into capital punishment/life imprisonment thread.

Feel free to start one.

[mur'phon]

here are other, cheaper, humane methods that are quick and painless. Also, what are we paying executors so damn much for?

 

The reason capital punishment is more expensive than life imprisonment is not executor pay, rather the insaneextra legal costs that is neccesary due to the sentence being irreversible. This means that it's quite hard to make executions cost effective compared to life imprisonment unless you believe the reduced costs makes up for the increase in executions of innocents.

 

If you want to cut costs, have them work, preferably somewhere where they can get a decent job after release, as a bonus, it makes re-offending far less likely.

[Blix]

At 14 years-old, Quantel Lotts received a life sentence for murdering his step brother and was tried as an adult. He is expected to spend the rest of his life in prison without the possibility of parole.

 

I have issues with this because a 13 year-old (when he committed the crime) had been tried as an adult and received the same thing as a death sentence. His crime involved stabbing his victim 30 times... which obviously was heinous. He deserved a severe sentence, but the idea of life in prison without the possibility of parole for a 14-year old just goes too far.

 

He was under 18... not saying he was 'just a kid,' but that he would do more time because he was so young. If he lived to be 73(today's average), that means 59 years behind bars. Some have criticized that he should have gotten a lethal injection instead, but I find that is going just as far. He has served nearly a decade of that time at present.

 

This guy had only killed one person... he was not a serial killer. He was only 14, which meant that he could well could be rehabilitated by a few decades in prison. Although that one victim was killed brutally, that in itself didn't justify a death sentence. I think that he should have been given the possibility for parole because he was under 18. One or two decades behind bars is real time I seriously think that he should have been given a less severe sentence.

 

What do others think of this?

 

 

(I realize that I must have come across a very old source. I hadn't realized that this took place nearly a decade ago. I really need to read the dates properly.)

 

I agree with you for the most part, 14 is a young age you're still growing up not saying that murdering someone is okay because of said age but there is a fine line between killing someone at 14 with the mentality of a 14-year old and killing someone at say 25 with and adult mentality.

 

For the most part I just have to sympathize with the taxpayers who are surely paying for this kid's (now adult man I suppose) life stay at jail, which isn't cheap. For the second instance I had described I would probably be partial to agreeing for a death row sentence, but being the age of 14 at the time when the murder was done there's no saying that he hasn't made a full 180 as Darth Yuthura had previously mentioned.

[Darth_Yuthura]

Thank-you. Most who have posted simply say he should have either gotten worse, or that he got what he deserved. Given that this person was still very young, a few years in prison would be more likely to change his mentality than someone who was much older.

 

Parole isn't so much setting him lose as it is getting him to support himself and not on taxpayer's dollars. If he were to be released... after passing for rehabilitation, he would be less expensive to take care of than a life sentence in prison. It simply would make no sense for this kind of sentence with no hope of parole and no death sentence. There HAS to be something better than this. I don't want him to die in prison of natural causes, but no one will stick a needle in his arm. If he's never getting a chance at parole, then he will be a weight on the American taxpayer for the rest of his life.

 

It has to be death or parole option... this sentence is the worst alternative to any other one out there.

[GeorgNihilus]

Let's just suppose we (law) allow his freedom at let's say ... 23 (sentence, parole, whatever). And he does it again, killing. What are we going to say to the next victim? we had the chance to lock him up and we (society-system) allowed his freedom. Just 13 years old when doing it but he killed, and in that way. Worst, these cases usually do stablish precedent for further trials; so from the moment we allow this boy's freedom and case is closed, many other similar cases will be solved same way.

 

Nevertheless, I don't agree with capital punishment; less at this age, so maybe life imprisonment is the unique choice for cases like this. Of course it's expensive for a society to feed people for 15, 25 or 50 years ... but it's the only choice IMHO. More prisons maybe too.

[Det. Bart Lasiter]

Prison simply makes someone a financial burden on society in addition to being a moral burden on society - and often times will amplify the latter as well - so that that we can all beat our chests and proclaim that justice has been done, when in fact, we've merely weakened our society as a whole.

[Web Rider]

Prison simply makes someone a financial burden on society in addition to being a moral burden on society - and often times will amplify the latter as well - so that that we can all beat our chests and proclaim that justice has been done, when in fact, we've merely weakened our society as a whole.

 

Which is why we need to have prisoners doing some kind of work that will benefit society while they're in prison, given the product scares from China, they could do product testing. If they die, oh well. If they don't, they're providing a valuable service to the country.

 

As well, criminals who are to be released soon after their crime or in the far future, should be taught job and social skills, and educated. Now, I'm not talking about a high-dollar university-level education, but many criminals don't even have basic high-school educations, sometimes less. And it would go a long way to reforming them to educate them in general knowledge and work skills, like a mechanic or a gardener or a stock-boy. Simple but useful.

[JuniorModder]

Even if he killed someone, you need to try and imagine what he's going through. He is young, and scared, upset. It wouldn't surprise me if he committed suicide. Everyone deserves a second chance. And one thing you all say is "He is young but that doesn't matter". He was young, and that DOES matter. Being young mean he hasn't experienced all that life has to offer. Just imagine, he will never fall in love and get married, he'll never be able to even drive a car. No Chirstmas, or birthdays with family. Everyone in the world hating him. He was stupid, and didn't exercise good judgement, but you should have mercy. I think a few years in prison, and then rehab, will be enough to teach him his lesson. I think that your opinions might change if it was you deciding his fate. Mine wouldn't, because my default is grace.

 

JuniorModder

[machievelli]

First, having juveniles commit the crime when you want some killed is a standard street gang technique. No record, less time. So age has nothing to do with it.

 

Second, I used to teach a class at the Renaissance Faire entitled Crime and punishment, comparing the two legal systems to each other.

 

Under the Elizabethan system it was considered cruel and unusual to make the person wait if sentenced to death. The maximum amount of time you could be held before execution of sentence was two months under Elizabeth, expanded to three when Scotland became part of it under James. There was no juvenile compared to adult justice. If you were capable of committing the crime, you were treated as an adult.

 

THird I am more upset with the waste of money in a strapped economy. This kid and the menendez brothers have one thing in common, a jury unwilling to merely excise the problem. Right now the State of California (Which is close to bankruptcy) spends over 60,000 dollars a year in salaries and plant maintence for the prisons to keep just one criminal in prison. Compare that to an average income at just above poverty level of less than 30,000.

 

It bothers me most because the same state pays less than 10,000 to keep a kid in school.

 

As for the cost of capital punishment... 'in terms of dollars is WAY too high to make sense on a massive scale'. True. However that cost is caused not by the penalty itself (A lethal injection costs about $20, A rope for hanging about $15 [remember plant maintenance? The scaffold gets used hundreds of times] Gas chamber after cost of the actual room about $11, Electrocution, $250. IT is caused by the constant appeals process. The first thing any lawyer smart enough to study at law school knows is; when in doubt, ask for a continuance at every level. All you have to convince is the judge. Then you spend the sometimes years on your butt, paid for your services by the client (Or the state if you're a public defender) trying to find legal reasons why your client should go free on a technicality. A perfect example is the Menendez case, where the first jury was hung. Not on guilt, but on the punishment.

 

For those who don't remember, the two boys (Youngest was 18 when the crime was committed) fired a shotgun into their parents fiurteen times, passing the gun back and forth as they did. The reason? Their parents wouldn't increase their allowances. They claimed abuse, and were only protecting themselves, but once the older boy passed the gun to his brother, it stopped being self defense.

 

Their lawyer assured the next jury was firmly against the death penalty, then asked for leniency because, get this, they were orphans.

[urluckyday]

Well it all depends on what you think of rapists/pedophile sentences I think. If they get life in prison w/ out paroll, then murderers should also get life in prison. If the sexual predators don't get life then there is no way a murderer deserves to get any more than that. I only bring up those comparisons because I think rapists/pedophiles have committed the most heinous of any crime...so I usually use what I think of those sentences to use almost a "scale."

 

I think this boy got what he deserved. He obviously wanted to kill him bad...and even though he is young...at age 14...I knew exactly what I was doing. I knew what would happen if I killed someone...he knew what would happen and he went through with it anyway. Sorry, troubled lives start at a young age and that's a pretty terrible start for him and I doubt you can "rehab" someone like that because they will never be okay. Even if he was given the chance of rehab and even paroll...how can you tell someone who's out of the normal world for over 20-30 years to just go on, get a job, and do what everyone else is doing? It won't happen. His sentence deserves to be long, but really, his life ended when he stabbed the other kid so it doesn't matter how long he's in jail.

 

I was reading more into things like this...and I really think that the US needs to implement a legitimate scale for how many years you get for killing anyone of any age. Like that mom I read about...5 of her kids...basically gets a bad rep but doesnt spend much time in jail...unacceptable. I mean, sure there are special circumstances like self-defense but if you get found guilty, you automatically get this many years (idk how many but more than a few for sure).

 

Idk, something just needs to change...

[Ztalker]

I'm more in support of this then the system used in other countries (mainly Europe).

 

In the US, you are responsible and you do your time. Although some punishments are...very long or just bad (death sentence imo) it's better then what's happening over here.

 

Over here, your record is CLEANED when you're 18.

A woman slave trader recently escaped here because 'a prisoner has the right to see his child' and so he was released from prison for a week orso and simply fled.

Some years ago, a diagnosed psychopath did the same and murdered someone on his 'vacation' from prison.

 

Oh yeah. Did I mentioned prisoners here have a PC (with internet), TV stereo system and sports? That's FAR better then hard-working but poor people have.

 

Please be glad that people are held responsible for their deeds by the system and are punished for it. Maybe to severe though, but that's impossible to wager.

 

If I kill someone when I'm 13 or 14 shouldn't matter. If they find the victim

's body in my house, with 30 gunshot wounds, seventeen knife stabs and a bear trap I knew what I was doing and should be punished so. My age shouldn't matter because there are smart children and stupid adults and vice versa(to put it bluntly).

[ForeverNight]

I'm more in support of this then the system used in other countries (mainly Europe).

 

In the US, you are responsible and you do your time. Although some punishments are...very long or just bad (death sentence imo) it's better then what's happening over here.

 

Over here, your record is CLEANED when you're 18.

A woman slave trader recently escaped here because 'a prisoner has the right to see his child' and so he was released from prison for a week orso and simply fled.

Some years ago, a diagnosed psychopath did the same and murdered someone on his 'vacation' from prison.

 

Oh yeah. Did I mentioned prisoners here have a PC (with internet), TV stereo system and sports? That's FAR better then hard-working but poor people have.

 

Please be glad that people are held responsible for their deeds by the system and are punished for it. Maybe to severe though, but that's impossible to wager.

 

If I kill someone when I'm 13 or 14 shouldn't matter. If they find the victim

's body in my house, with 30 gunshot wounds, seventeen knife stabs and a bear trap I knew what I was doing and should be punished so. My age shouldn't matter because there are smart children and stupid adults and vice versa(to put it bluntly).

 

Quoted for Sheer Epic Win.

 

It wouldn't surprise me if he committed suicide. Everyone deserves a second chance.

 

Going to disagree with you here, there are people who don't deserve a second chance, I include Murders, Rapists and those who sexually exploit minors in this group. I'm sickened that you can't see that.

 

Being young mean he hasn't experienced all that life has to offer. Just imagine, he will never fall in love and get married, he'll never be able to even drive a car. No Chirstmas, or birthdays with family. Everyone in the world hating him. He was stupid, and didn't exercise good judgement, but you should have mercy. I think a few years in prison, and then rehab, will be enough to teach him his lesson. I think that your opinions might change if it was you deciding his fate. Mine wouldn't, because my default is grace

 

He screwed up and killed somebody, he doesn't deserve to get these things from what he did. Stabbing somebody 30 times isn't a mistake, it's deliberate. He should get executed or life, not let off when he's above the age of majority.

 

Under the Elizabethan system it was considered cruel and unusual to make the person wait if sentenced to death. The maximum amount of time you could be held before execution of sentence was two months under Elizabeth, expanded to three when Scotland became part of it under James. There was no juvenile compared to adult justice. If you were capable of committing the crime, you were treated as an adult.

 

If only, if only.....

 

Their lawyer assured the next jury was firmly against the death penalty, then asked for leniency because, get this, they were orphans.

 

I'm ashamed to admit that I laughed at that.....

 

I doubt you can "rehab" someone like that because they will never be okay.

 

Yep, not everybody can be 'rehab'-ed, the more people realize this, the better off we'll be.

 

I was reading more into things like this...and I really think that the US needs to implement a legitimate scale for how many years you get for killing anyone of any age. Like that mom I read about...5 of her kids...basically gets a bad rep but doesnt spend much time in jail...unacceptable. I mean, sure there are special circumstances like self-defense but if you get found guilty, you automatically get this many years (idk how many but more than a few for sure).

 

Nah, just go back to Hammurabi and make a life worth your life. Then each additional life worth x amount of lashes with the cat o' nine tails. Let's see how many people will want to break that law.

[Astor]

Everyone deserves a second chance. And one thing you all say is "He is young but that doesn't matter". He was young, and that DOES matter. Being young mean he hasn't experienced all that life has to offer.

 

I'm normally in favour of giving people a second chance, but not over murder.

 

Just imagine, he will never fall in love and get married, he'll never be able to even drive a car. No Chirstmas, or birthdays with family.

 

His step-brother will never experience any of these things either, so I don't see why he should.

[Jae Onasi]

The sentence isn't just about punishment. It's also about protecting the rest of society from someone who has committed a vicious, brutal murder. I think mercy is a good thing and second chances are important for people who can indeed be rehabbed. However, some people are just so damaged psychologically that they simply can't be rehabbed. This kid stabbed another child into oblivion. This was no accident. It was a horrendous crime, and I don't know that I could trust him never to do something this horrible ever again. Giving him another chance, only to have him murder again, would be one more death too many. I don't know that the state can afford to take the risk. I do know I wouldn't want him anywhere near my family for fear that he would hurt them.

[machievelli]

The worst part of people pleading for mercy in cases like this is the fact that a criminal has more rights than the victim ever had. They suggested chemical castration in Califorina for child molesters, but it was shot down because it violates the criminal's rights to reproduce. If they ever develop a way to do a mind wipe, removing the personality and replacing it with someone who would be productive, it would be fought on the same grounds, that a murderer's memories are more important than supplying a productive member of society.

 

Some right to life idjit arguing against the death penalty claimed we would be judged as a society by how we treat our worst, in their case, meaning some person that wasn't worth the cost of the bullet.

 

My answer was that Hellen Keller succeeding in leading a full and productive life, Stephen Hawking even trapped in his wheel chair has done seminal work that will outlive him in physics, and Franklyn Rossevelt became president even with polio crippled legs.

 

But someone who put his own wants needs and desires above another person's life only deserves the same pity I have for any animal that attacks a human being. To be put down mercifully

[ForeverNight]

Franklyn Rossevelt?

 

 

Anyway, I agree. I'm a little leary about replacing memories, but otherewise I'm in full agreement. Just give a punishment that fits the crime and leave it at that. While I agree with some criminal rights -the US isn't China- there's Criminal Rights and then there's Bat-****-Crazy.

 

Ah well, least he got his life.... several years ago. Now lets hope he became 'friends' with some guy called Bubba.

 

[D'oh]

This kid gets life and Dante Stallworth gets 30 days. Where is justice ?

 

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=7867036&page=1

[ForeverNight]

Dante didn't get only 30 days if you'll read your own article.

 

Other than that, I might assume some money changed hands, but that's all I can guess w/o knowing the full story.

 

Besides, this guy was deliberate, Dante's wasn't.

[Ztalker]

The worst part of people pleading for mercy in cases like this is the fact that a criminal has more rights than the victim ever had. They suggested chemical castration in Califorina for child molesters, but it was shot down because it violates the criminal's rights to reproduce. If they ever develop a way to do a mind wipe, removing the personality and replacing it with someone who would be productive, it would be fought on the same grounds, that a murderer's memories are more important than supplying a productive member of society.

 

Some right to life idjit arguing against the death penalty claimed we would be judged as a society by how we treat our worst, in their case, meaning some person that wasn't worth the cost of the bullet.

 

My answer was that Hellen Keller succeeding in leading a full and productive life, Stephen Hawking even trapped in his wheel chair has done seminal work that will outlive him in physics, and Franklyn Rossevelt became president even with polio crippled legs.

 

But someone who put his own wants needs and desires above another person's life only deserves the same pity I have for any animal that attacks a human being. To be put down mercifully

Quoted for epicness

 

This kid gets life and Dante Stallworth gets 30 days. Where is justice ?

 

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=7867036&page=1

That's the only problem I have with some countries (especially the US') law system. Money can help you. I call it OJ-ism.

[Web Rider]

This kid gets life and Dante Stallworth gets 30 days. Where is justice ?

 

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=7867036&page=1

 

That depends on what you call "justice".

 

Should every person who ever killed another person for ANY reason be put in jail for life? If this were the way we should look at it, we should all lock ourselves up. Because we are all responsible for somebody's death in some way or another, even if you have to use the 6-point-rule to do it.

 

Is drinking and driving stupid? Hell yes. Should everyone with a grade-school education know better? Damn right they should. But lots of people get drunk, and lots of people drive drunk, not all of them cause accidents. Fewer of those actually kill people.

 

Is running across the street stupid? Yes it is. Should everyone with a grade-school education know better? Damn right they should. But lots of people do it and lots of people get killed for it. The man he killed I'm certain was in no crosswalk. Should be have been sent to jail as well if he survived?

 

Lotts is in prison Stallworth is not for two important reasons besides money. Stallworth committed a crime of stupidity. He drove drunk, and for that stupidity, someone died. He did not go out wanting to kill someone, he did not go out targeting this man in particular. He even stuck around the crime-scene, very few hit+run drivers do that. In short, Stallworth was stupid and owned up to his crime.

 

Lotts is in prison because he killed his brother in cold blood. He did not have the assistance of alcohol to inhibit his thinking, he did not have a car to propel him at inhuman speeds. He and his brother were playing a friendly game, that Lotts decided to make into a deadly one. Lotts is in prison because he made the decision to escalate a situation into violence and he chose to murder his brother. It was not a "stupid mistake". Thinking you're sober enough to drive is a "stupid mistake". Stupid mistakes do not include "I think I'm going to go from playing a fun game with fake guns, to taking a real knife and stabbing my brother."

 

So, is it "justice" that the death of a man by a stupid mistake results in a lighter punishment than the death of a minor by a desire to kill? Yeah, I think it is.

[D'oh]

Dante didn't get only 30 days if you'll read your own article.

 

Other than that, I might assume some money changed hands, but that's all I can guess w/o knowing the full story.

 

Besides, this guy was deliberate, Dante's wasn't.

 

I love how you tell me to read the article. When the article says he reached a financial settlement already.

[Jae Onasi]

Posts on drunk driving crimes have been moved to this thread. Carry on.