A 15-year-old teenager that was accuse in February of a crime spree, along with a teenager Sirquain Burr, 17-year-old, that has been charged of face murder, attempted murder and other charges. The crime was at the Brownsburg area, IN.
The crime was a multi-car accident that was the result of a police chase involving a suspect of a shooting earlier in the day.
The defendant was and still is 15-year-old at the time of the crime and at the time of the trial.
The charges that the 15-year-old teen is being charged for be accomplice of Sirquain Burr while he shot and killed Yingling, who was in the driver’s seat of his truck in the 3300 block of Babette Court. Also for attempting murder of Rex Scouter, 64, who was shot while walking his dog near Dandy Trail and Ruthergien way.
No, there was no discussion in the article about the background/history of the defendants.
The parents of the accused did not say anything, or at least not in the article.
There will be a court of The three-day hearing starting on May 28 in the juvenile division of Marion Superior Court where the Judge Marylin Moored will decide whether to tried the 15-year-old suspect as an adult like Burr, or tried him as a teenager.
There were four comments and all of them relate to each other, they said that the court (jury) should not think twice and prosecute both teenagers as adults; if they were willing to commit those crimes without thinking it then they are old enough to face the consequences of their actions.
The defendant will be sentence on the three day hearin that will begin on May 28, therefore the sentence of the Judge Marylin Moores will be known either on May 31 or April 1.
Well it is kind of difficult to know if we should take brain research into account in this case, “Judge to decide in May whether teen will be charged as an adult in crime spree”, since there is no background/history of the teens in the article we cannot tell if they had problems at home or if they were being physical/mental abused. I think we should not take brain research into account, if the other teenager, Siquain Burr, that killed one person and attempt to murder another one was tried as an adult then with the 15-year-old should the jury do the same, I mean at the age of 15 everyone knows the difference of right versus wrong, and they can take decisions on their own.
If the outlaw changed and juveniles would be trying as adults this case should not be longer a case, it will be already done and both teenagers would be in jail, charged as adults and with a sentence of death penalty.
If the juveniles at the crime time were adults the judge would not think it twice and immediately will give sentence of death penalty for the charges of murder, attempt of murder, possession of weapon and a stolen vehicle, plus other charges they can take account.
The sentence has not being said until May 31, but if I was the jury I would not think it twice and I immediately will try the 15-year-old as an adult charged him for being accomplice and suspect of attempt murder, and will give sentence of formal prison.
This case says that the juvenile justice system is not doing its job. They make a storm in a glass of water, instead of spending time whether to try a teen that commit murder, they should give immediately sentence of formal prison. If this case would it be about a Hispanic teen being the accomplice of murder then the jury automatically give sentence of formal prison without looking at the defendant background or try to find reason why he commit murder. What I will change is make a new juvenile justice system that really will do its job, they will give sentence if the teenager that are being tried are old enough to know the difference between right vs. wrong and can take their own decisions. Although there will be some exceptions looking into the background/history of the defendants and deciding whether to take make a brain research into account or just give sentence of formal prison.
No comments:
Post a Comment