Join the Discussion

Comments So Far: 31

• 0%

  1-2-Oscar2 months, 4 weeks ago

  The prosecutor will be obliged to explain to a court WHY this 14-year-old defendant should be treated differently from other 14-year-old defendants. The sexual orientation of the victim is not sufficient cause to try McInerney as an adult. There will have to be some other compelling reason.

  Reply

  3 Replies

  • 0%

    hamy2 months, 4 weeks ago

    But the brutality of the murder is reason enough to try him as an adult.

    What a horrible crime.

    Actually, his parents should be on trial with him. They are the ones who taught him to hate people enough to kill.

    Reply
  • 0%

    kedirian2 months, 4 weeks ago

    1-2, what is the difference between a Muslim youth trained to be a suicide-attacker and a "christian" youth trained to believe that homosexuality is SIN?

    Would you treat that Muslim youth as an adult??????

    Reply

    1 Reply

    • 0%

      1-2-Oscar2 months, 4 weeks ago

      That's a strange question, and one which which seems to have no relevance. The LAW is obliged to treat all defendants equally.

      Reply
• 0%

  Hobe2 months, 4 weeks ago

  Accused Treated as Adult in Gay Student's Killing

  Prosecutors' decision to charge Brandon McInerney, 14, as an adult in the shooting death of Larry King, 15.

  McInerney is charged with premeditated murder and a hate crime in the killing of King, an openly HoMosexual eighth-grader.

  This 14 year old youth is a first class horrific Murderer and deserves to be prosecuted as an adult. This effort will ensure that this deranged Killer will never have the opportunity to Kill again.

  It's a very Sad situation, it would be even sadder if he is allowed to Kill again.

  For those who disagree, would You want this 14 year year old living next door to Your family with a teenage Son or daughter?

  I Think Not.... Take this Nut off the streets...

  Reply
• 0%

  david_nwpa2 months, 4 weeks ago

  1-2-Oscar, unless you are an attorney, I doubt your understanding of the law will come into play in court. Not being licensed to practice before the Court in California, I am not sure of their laws. Here in Pennsylvania, we have a number of juvenile defendants tried as adults and successfully prosecuted. The defendant in the McInerney case acted with malice aforethought and with cruel intentions. His sole purpose for bringing the gun to school that day was to shoot his classmate. Sexual orientation is a point to be shown at trial before a jury, but not in family court. This case should be bound over for trial as an adult.

  Reply

  6 Replies

  • 0%

    1-2-Oscar2 months, 4 weeks ago

    I believe that there is no difference between the rights that gays and straights in our society should enjoy, and there should be no difference in the protections that the society extends to them. That is an attitude which is well founded in both common and statutory law.

    If the only distinction between this defendant, who is to be charged as an adult, and persons who have committed similar crimes and are charged as juveniles, is that the victim was gay, then it is obvious that the accused is being singled out for reasons which are based upon an inequitable application of the law. If that is true, then the defendant, if convicted, is going to have a very good chance of getting an adverse decision overturned. It is only just if he is charged without regard to the status of his victim--rich or ppor, gay or straight, notable or unknown.

    You can doubt my understanding all you damned well please, but I have no evidence that YOU are an attorney with experience in this area.

    Reply
  • 0%

    david_nwpa2 months, 4 weeks ago

    No, Oscar, it is not the sole reason why he is being charged as an adult. His case is similar in nature to other California cases in which gang children committed heinous murders and were tried as adults. Cases abound throughout the United States. The Supreme Court ruled that McInerney cannot be given the death penalty, but he can be treated as an adult for his crime.

    The sole difference in this case is not sexual orientation. For the record, I do indeed doubt your experience as a practicing attorney, but suit yourself.

    Reply

    4 Replies

    • 0%

      1-2-Oscar2 months, 4 weeks ago

      My point was simple enough that even the most dedicated member of the "victim class" (a role you play here consistently) should be able to understand.

      If the circumstances were simply reversed, and the gay student shot the straight student, would he be tried as an adult? If we can't, without hesitation, say yes, then there is an inequity in the application of justice. I believe that no inequity should exist. If you disagree with that idea, then you should say so, and quit whining. But you will be wrong, wrong, wrong--legally and morally.

      I claimed no experience "as a practicing attorney." You may reread above and confirm that I did not. What you challenged was my "understanding." I am going to inform you straight-away that I understand EXACTLY what I have said. You may disagree with any opinion I express here, but you are not privileged to misrepresent what I have said.

      Reply
    • 0%

      david_nwpa2 months, 4 weeks ago

      Oscar,

      For the record, yes, if the roles were reversed, I can say unequivocally, I would recommend that Lawrence be tried as an adult. The question is not why Brandon killed Lawrence. The question is premeditation. It existed. The crime is murder one. That is an adult crime; the case should be tried as an adult. That is equitable.

      Reply

      2 Replies

      • 0%

        1-2-Oscar2 months, 4 weeks ago

        You still don't get it. What YOU would recommend is totally irrelevant. My comment addressed what needed to be done under California law. "The prosecutor will be obliged to explain to a court WHY this 14-year-old defendant should be treated differently from other 14-year-old defendants."

        In support of trying McInerney as an adult you said, "His case is similar in nature to other California cases in which gang children committed heinous murders and were tried as adults." Yet there was nothing in the article to indicate that McInerney is or has ever been a member of a gang. In fact the article presented him as "a popular boy in school, a surfer and member of the Young Marines." In a fourteen-year-old, premeditation alone is insufficient grounds for moving the trial to the adult venue. There have been recent cases in GA and FLA where teens were tried and convicted as adults, only to have the verdicts overturned and/or the sentences reduced on this point.

        Reply
      • 0%

        david_nwpa2 months, 4 weeks ago

        You asked me what I would do if the roles were reversed, and I told you what I would recommend!

        As for this case, McInerney will appear before a judge and the prosecutor will explain why he should be tried as an adult. Statute in California allows the prosecutor the option of trying juveniles as young as 14 as an adult, depending on the severity of the crime. McInerney committed first degree murder with numerous witnesses. He brought the gun to school and committed a savage crime. If he is held as a juvenile, he will be free for release at 24. The prosecutor has sufficient evidence to move the case to Superior Court.

        Reply
• 0%

  newbie04202 months, 4 weeks ago

  this kid should be off the street but he also shouldn't be treated any differently than any other 14 year old who did the same thing to a straight/black/anything kid.

  Reply

  2 Replies

  • 0%

    Mdiar2 months, 4 weeks ago

    Frankly, I think any kid who goes out and commits premeditated murder deserves to be tried as an adult unless relevant social factors exist, for example kills a parent who may be sexually abusing him/her.

    Reply
  • 0%

    hamy2 months, 4 weeks ago

    Premeditated murder. Murder one. That is a crime that I think deserves an adult sentence. It's an adult crime. He knew what he was doing. And now he has to pay for it.

    I for one would be more than happy to see this defendent get the death penalty. Just like the sentence he handed down to that poor kid.

    Reply
• 0%

  oldgringo2 months, 4 weeks ago

  Considering the violence this boy grew up with, and the gun he got from his home, perhaps they should be prosecuting his parents, too. Sad, very sad.

  Reply
• 0%

  nothingpetty2 months, 4 weeks ago

  Most cultures recognize 12 and 13 as a coming of age for a male. Jews have their bar-mitsvahs (Today,I am a man)and Catholics have Confirmation. It is assumed that they have formed an adult ability to know, and choose, right from wrong and are attesting to it.

  I have no problem with his being treated as an adult, in this particular instance.

  Oldgringo has a point, also.

  Reply

  4 Replies

  • 0%

    1-2-Oscar2 months, 4 weeks ago

    McInerney will not be tried in either a Jewish or a Catholic court. He is to be tried in California, under California law. If California does not consistently try fourteen-year-old defendants as adults, then they must CAUSE why McInerney should be treated differently.

    Reply
  • 0%

    1-2-Oscar2 months, 4 weeks ago

    McInerney will not be tried in a Jewish court or a Catholic court. He will be tried in a California court, and we should expect California's laws to be applied. If the State of California usually tries fourteen-year-old defendants as juveniles, then they MUST present compelling reasons for treating McInerney differently.

    Reply

    2 Replies

    • 0%

      1-2-Oscar2 months, 4 weeks ago

      I apologize for the duplicate comment. When an entry does not show up on Propeller after five minutes, then I often repost it, thinking that my initial attempt had been condemned to wander forever in the boundless ether (or has been stored in Tom Drapeau's garage).

      Reply
    • 0%

      nothingpetty2 months, 4 weeks ago

      Charging this kid as an adult will not set a precedient.

      200,000 juveniles a year are charged as adults across the country. There is a difference in offense between stealing a bike and carrying a gun into school for the express purpose of murdering someone. Most times, juvenile crimes are a combination of impulse and opportunity. The murder, in this case, was a deliberate, planed effort.

      There are actually some better arguments against trying the kid as an adult, but none have been mentioned here. Type kids charged as adults into your search engine.

      Reply
• 0%

  mackiemesser2 months, 4 weeks ago

  How many 14 year olds in California carried a gun to school and shot a classmate in a classroom in front of other 14 year olds many of whom must have been traumatized by the experience? If there were even one and he was tried as a juvenile, then try this kid as a juvenile. How many 14 year olds killed another kid in such a cold blooded deliberate manner and were tried as juveniles? I would like to know if these cases existed in California. If they were, then this kid should be tried as a juvenile. Otherwise, fry him (which they can't. unfortunately).

  Reply
• 0%

  Itachirumon2 months, 4 weeks ago

  1-2, how many times must we tell you you f*cking idiot? He is being tried as an adult because of PREMEDITATED MURDER. You bitching about the gang comment is just spitting hairs. I've taken 2 semesters of Administration of Justice. I'll level with you, the second was a repeat of the first because I overslept and missed my online final dropping my grade from the B I would have had to a D, but after one year of basic law I can tell you McIrney needs to be tried as an adult. Why'd he have the gun on him that day? To kill Larry King, he confessed to this I believe

  Reply

  1 Reply

  • 0%

    1-2-Oscar2 months, 4 weeks ago

    "The prosecutor will be obliged to explain to a court WHY this 14-year-old defendant should be treated differently from other 14-year-old defendants." If there is any reason, other than the sexual preference of the victim, for McInerney to be tried as an adult, neither you nor any other person in this thread has brought it up. I am insistent that justice demands that ALL defendants be treated equally. Premeditation alone DOES NOT provide sufficient reason, because others in similar circumstances are not routinely treated as adults in California.

    As Alexander Pope advised, "Drink deep or taste not the Pierian Spring."

    Reply
• 0%

  Itachirumon2 months, 4 weeks ago

  The ONLY SINGLE thing his being gay has on the bearing of the case is that it gave McIrney motive to perform the crime. It's Criminology 101. He comitted the crime, he did it with malice aforethought THERE is your extinuating circumstance. I believe you have lost this argument 1-2, unless you can prove to me without spin why he should be tried as a juvinile after comitting murder one?

  Reply

  5 Replies

  • 0%

    1-2-Oscar2 months, 4 weeks ago

    Apparently I have WON the argument, since you cannot tell WHY McInerney should be treated differently from others charged with similar offenses. Justice must be consistent.

    Reply

    1 Reply

    • 0%

      Natureboy2 months, 4 weeks ago

      More to the point, developmental psychology is consistent. If people are not psychologically mature enough to be held fully accountable as adults prior to their 18th birthday, that is what it is. There is no sound reasoning supporting trying juveniles as adults just because they did something particularly heinous.

      Reply
  • 0%

    david_nwpa2 months, 4 weeks ago

    He did tell you why. The crime is Murder 1. It is a capital crime. The death penalty cannot be applied because he is a minor. Apart from that, he can be tried as an adult on California law. It is within the discretion of the court and the prosecutor.

    Reply

    2 Replies

    • 0%

      Itachirumon2 months, 4 weeks ago

      THANK YOU. God what is it with 1-2, are you seriously that dense man? Let me spell it out for you again just in case the ten times it's been mentioned here didn't get it through your thick, ignorant, spin-worthy head.

      The Crime Was Murder One: This alone is enough to try him as an adult. Murder One proves the crime was comitted with malice aforethought, for you imbiciles that means premeditated.

      McInerney is not being treated differently from anybody else in this situation. How do you even know, how many cases have you SEEN in California where a 14 yr old kills a 15 yr old and the case actually goes to trial?

      Administration of Justice 101: Less than 10% of ALL cases go to trial. Most are settled out of court or through plea bargining.

      Natureboy - Developmental psychology is a guideline, people can mature faster or slower than that. It's a good argument, but it's not absolute.

      Reply

      1 Reply

      • 0%

        Itachirumon2 months, 4 weeks ago

        Again: THE SENTENCE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH HIM BEING GAY. IF THIS IMBICILE CAME FORWARD AND SHOT A STRAIGHT GUY FOR BEING STRAIGHT THERE'D BE NO ARGUMENT. His being gay is being counted as a MOTIVE for McIreney to have KILLED King. You know, Motive? The reason behind every crime? The motive doesn't usually effect the sentence. Idiot

        Reply
• 0%

  david_nwpa2 months, 4 weeks ago

  Or, the district attorney may request that the juvenile be "remanded" to adult court because the juvenile is "unfit" to be adjudicated as a juvenile due to the nature of his or her offense. For a juvenile who is adjudicated and whose petition is sustained (tried and convicted) in juvenile court, the offender can be placed on probation in the community, placed in a foster care or group home, incarcerated in the county's juvenile ranch or camp, or sent to the Youth Authority as a ward of the state. For a juvenile tried and convicted in adult court, the offender can be sentenced to the Department of Corrections, but can be placed in the Youth Authority through age 24.

  http://www.lao.ca.gov/1995/050195_juv_crime/kkp...

  Reply