Teens sentenced to life w/o parole

[didymus]

There’s a story in today’s NY Times about 13 & 14 yr-olds sentenced to life in prison w/o possibility of parole, which I hadn’t known was possible. There’s also a link to a report from an advocacy group, the Equal Justice Initiative [who invents these names?] about it.

I really don’t care about how US law compares to international law, which the story and the report both go into, but the basic question:
Don’t we have an obligation to try to salvage these kids, no matter how horrible their crimes, rather than just throwing them away?

I know “the age of reason” is reckoned to be seven or eight [forget which]. But we all know teens are busting with hormones, have poor to nil impulse control and science tells us their brains aren’t fully formed yet.
When some terrible crime is committed I often hear people say that the perp is a psychopath or “has no conscience” or even “has no soul”, which always bugs me – and I really hate the idea of making that judgment about kids too young to get a learner’s permit.

 

[Della]

The article itself states that no one in America thinks that all teens who kill ought to be put in prison for life but only those who commit egregious crimes of violence.

There are people “without a conscience.” They’re classified as “sociopathic.” Most will never kill anyone but those that do often commit the most heinous crimes. Jeffery McDonald is a good example, although he wasn’t a teen when he murdered his pregnant wife and two little girls.

People in America are tired of the revolving prison door that lets violent criminals go free to kill again and again. It may be that some of the cases of teen killers sentenced to life without parole should be looked into, still the number is quite low considering the population. So, keeping them from killing again may be worth it.

 

[didymus]

The article itself states that no one in America thinks that all teens who kill ought to be put in prison for life but only those who commit egregious crimes of violence.

There are people “without a conscience.”

IF that’s true I don’t think that means they are hopeless. If you look at the stories in the report most of them came from an environment where they received no moral guidance at all & the only rule was survival.

They’re classified as “sociopathic.”

So hanging a label on them justifies throwing them away? Why not just call them “witches” and burn them? I have the sinking feeling that the same principle is at work but “sociopath” is supposedly a scientific term.

People in America are tired of the revolving prison door that lets violent criminals go free to kill again and again. It may be that some of the cases of teen killers sentenced to life without parole should be looked into, still the number is quite low considering the population. So, keeping them from killing again may be worth it.

As for the “revolving door” some of the so-called solutions are worse than the problem, like life sentences for repeat offenders, even though each individual offence may be nonviolent.
Some of those serving life w/o parole are not “teen killers” they committed terrible crimes but didn’t kill anyone.
True, there are few cases of teens sentenced to life w/o parole (or death in prison as the report calls it) but I’m sure the number of teens sentenced to long stretches in adult prison is much larger.

They say if your only tool is a hammer all your problem start looking like nails. Well, it seems like prison is America’s only response to crime. Legislators, prosecutors and judges are all elected and the best way for them to do that is to promise to “get tough” on crime.

 

[vern_humphrey]

The Catholic position is that the criminal justice system exists to protect society. When we allow sociopaths to walk the streets, we fail in that objective.

 

[Newbie2]

The Catholic position is that the criminal justice system exists to protect society. When we allow sociopaths to walk the streets, we fail in that objective.

That’s a good point, vern. Locking them away doesn’t mean that we cannot attempt to rehabilitate them…but then that’s another practical matter for another discussion.

 

[vern_humphrey]

That’s a good point, vern. Locking them away doesn’t mean that we cannot attempt to rehabilitate them…but then that’s another practical matter for another discussion.

I once took Criminology courses from the head sociologist in the Louisiana penal system. He had a saying, “Before you set out to rehabilitate someone, be sure he was habilitated to begin with.”

There is no way of telling a sociopath is rehabilitated, short of turning him out into society. It’s an experiment.

When he kills again, you know the experiment failed.

 

[Della]

IF that’s true I don’t think that means they are hopeless. If you look at the stories in the report most of them came from an environment where they received no moral guidance at all & the only rule was survival.

Such circumstances should be taken into consideration in sentencing, and usually are–too much so in some areas of the country, but that’s a topic for another thread.

So hanging a label on them justifies throwing them away? Why not just call them “witches” and burn them? I have the sinking feeling that the same principle is at work but “sociopath” is supposedly a scientific term.

Sentencing someone to life in prison is not throwing them away. It is better than condemning them to death, at least according to those opposed to the death penalty. And what burning witches has to do with sentencing someone to a life sentence eludes me. Your feelings may or may not be reliable, but they certainly don’t define psychological terms such as sociopath, as you yourself cited, it’s a scientific term not a derogatory one.

As for the “revolving door” some of the so-called solutions are worse than the problem, like life sentences for repeat offenders, even though each individual offence may be nonviolent.
Some of those serving life w/o parole are not “teen killers” they committed terrible crimes but didn’t kill anyone.
True, there are few cases of teens sentenced to life w/o parole (or death in prison as the report calls it) but I’m sure the number of teens sentenced to long stretches in adult prison is much larger.

Each case has to be considered based on its own merits. It’s why we have laws and judges and juries. If you don’t care for our laws (and you may be justified in this) then do what you can to change them. We live in a democracy. It’s doable.

They say if your only tool is a hammer all your problem start looking like nails. Well, it seems like prison is America’s only response to crime. Legislators, prosecutors and judges are all elected and the best way for them to do that is to promise to “get tough” on crime.

And what response to crime would you propose? Seriously. Many things have been tried down through the years that solved neither the problem of rampant crime nor why people turn to crime. If you know the answer then work to promote it, but be sure you really do know the answer or you will end up, as so many other well-meaning people have, by making things worse than they already are.

 

[Ramalama]

*"Her granddaughter Ashley Jones was 14 when she helped her boyfriend kill her grandfather and aunt — Mrs. Nalls’s husband and daughter — by stabbing and shooting them and then setting them on fire. Ms. Jones also tried to kill her 10-year-old sister.

Mrs. Nalls, who was badly injured in the rampage, showed a visitor to her home a white scar on her forehead, a reminder of the burns that put her into a coma for 30 days. She had also been shot in the shoulder and stabbed in the chest.

“I forgot,” she said later. “They stabbed me in the jaw, too.”"*

The only thing I’m worried about is that this woman will someday be let out. Life, which usually nets out to 20 years, doesn’t seem like enough. Hormones don’t make people do this. This woman’s a monster.

 

[bilop]

"Her granddaughter Ashley Jones was 14 when she helped her boyfriend kill her grandfather and aunt — Mrs. Nalls’s husband and daughter — by stabbing and shooting them and then setting them on fire. Ms. Jones also tried to kill her 10-year-old sister.

Mrs. Nalls, who was badly injured in the rampage, showed a visitor to her home a white scar on her forehead, a reminder of the burns that put her into a coma for 30 days. She had also been shot in the shoulder and stabbed in the chest.

“I forgot,” she said later. “They stabbed me in the jaw, too.”"

Aparently there were plans to kill a fourth person as well. This was pre-meditated.

She is probably a sociopath. I only hope life means life, and she doesn’t harm anyone in prison. She will have time in prison to repent.

God Bless

 

[TOP]

The Catholic position is that the criminal justice system exists to protect society. When we allow sociopaths to walk the streets, we fail in that objective.

Before we start locking up everyone with social issues, lets see what we are dealing with.
so·ci·o·path (sō’sē-ə-păth’, -shē-)
n.
One who is affected with a personality disorder marked by antisocial behavior.

Lets stick with violent criminals and not include people with personality disorders.

 

[RobHom]

Before we start locking up everyone with social issues, lets see what we are dealing with.
so·ci·o·path (sō’sē-ə-păth’, -shē-)
n.
One who is affected with a personality disorder marked by antisocial behavior.

Lets stick with violent criminals and not include people with personality disorders.

A sociopath…is very often a psychopath, and quite often these people manifest their antisocial behaviors through violence. Ted Bundy comes to mind, as does Eileen Wournos, and any number of others.

Where murderers who have committed 1st degree premeditated murder are concerned…their sentences should not be concerned with rehabilitation or salvaging them. The sentences meted out to these individuals are geared to protect society from them. You cannot redeem a premeditated killer, any more than you can rehabilitate a serial killer or pedophile. They need to be put away for the rest of their natural lives, or put down.

Would you prefer to have a cold blooded killer sell a line of “Gee, I’m sorry, and I won’t do it again…” and get paroled just to kill another innocent person? Sorry, no thanks. Lock em up, keep em locked up. And if they are determined to be mentally ill, there are facilities for them as well.

 

[mpb74]

They are responsible for thier actions. They are a danger to society. They need to be kept away from innocent people who just want to go about thier lives.

Maybe the next person they murder will have mortal sin on his consience but figures he can go to confession on Saturday. They murder him on tuesday while he’s still in mortal sin. Does he go to hell? Because these poor teens had a rough childhood.

I do wish there was a place in the system that would be more beneficial to them if they would repent and change thier values. Even if there was such a system it needs to be an extremely secure institution where they are kept away from innocent people.
They can only be salvaged to a certain point. They have lost the privelege to roam freely among us while they decide who thier next victims are

If you advocate thier eventual release would you want them to live next store to you. How worried would you be that they would murder your children or your grandchildren? Would you buy more secure locks and a better security system? Or should they be placed in a poor community where they came from to maybe kill poor people. Poor minorities are the victims of a disproportionate share of violent crime. I worked in law enforcement in poor minority communities. I had to tell mothers their 15 year old daughter was murdered. I saw a man die in front of his teenage children and his wife because a perp who was arrested a month before was free to rob our victim and shoot him in the throat when he stepped in front of his wife to protect her.

It’s the poor murderer who seems to be the victim. Maybe people feel they won’t be the next victim 5 or 10 years from now. You are probably correct. But when the violent criminal reoffends the victim will probably be a poor minority person. probably one who is trying to live a good decent life. Maybe one who is working hard to get his children a good education so they can climb out of virtual poverty.

Let the murderer live with you. That is walking the walk. Few will do that. Talking the talk, heck even I can do that. Roll the dice, It’s probably some poor minority who will pay the price. Oh yeah, his whole family too. But hey there’s plenty of them. Kind of like a retroactive margaret sanger movement.

Go talk to them in jail. Counsel them. Evangelize to them. Maybe even convert them. Even if they convert they’re still murderer’s and nothing can change that fact. Murderer’s kill people, that’s what they do. Anyone who helps a murderer attain freedom, then they kill again, that person is an accomplice. Ask norman mailer, he got an “author” out of jail, and the poor misunderstood murderer murdered again.

A life for a life. I think God almighty said that. Who am I to disagree?

No insult to anyone is intended. Simply stating what my well formed consience tells me. If this post offends you I apologize in advance. May all people have an oppotunity to live in the peace of the Lord. Dan

 

[didymus]

Sentencing someone to life in prison is not throwing them away. It is better than condemning them to death, at least according to those opposed to the death penalty.

When you condemn a young teenager to die in prison, without any attempt to help them that is throwing them away.
Yes, it is better than killing them outright.

And what burning witches has to do with sentencing someone to a life sentence eludes me. Your feelings may or may not be reliable, but they certainly don’t define psychological terms such as sociopath, as you yourself cited, it’s a scientific term not a derogatory one.

I meant to put scientific in quote marks. I certainly don’t consider psychiatry a science.

Each case has to be considered based on its own merits. It’s why we have laws and judges and juries.

But with mandatory sentences cases aren’t considered on their own merits. Judges have had discretion taken away from them and juries are not allowed to know what the result of a guilty verdict will be.

If you don’t care for our laws (and you may be justified in this) then do what you can to change them. We live in a democracy. It’s doable.

Maybe I will, though on this issue “doable” is questionable.

And what response to crime would you propose? Seriously. Many things have been tried down through the years that solved neither the problem of rampant crime nor why people turn to crime. If you know the answer then work to promote it, but be sure you really do know the answer or you will end up, as so many other well-meaning people have, by making things worse than they already are.

What do I propose? I don’t know. I do know that certain things are wrong.
Sentencing people to life as “habitual” felons is wrong. Certainly criminal history should be considered in whether to sentence someone to the minimum or the max for each offence. But life for “habituals” is jailing people for what they are rather than what they have done, the same as the USSR sending “antisocial elements” to the Gulag.
Likewise keeping people in prison for fear they will re-offend, as with these teenagers is, in effect, punishing them for crimes they haven’t committed.
I know other countries have lower crime rates without keeping such a huge portion of the population locked up.

 

[Newbie2]

I once took Criminology courses from the head sociologist in the Louisiana penal system. He had a saying, “Before you set out to rehabilitate someone, be sure he was habilitated to begin with.”

There is no way of telling a sociopath is rehabilitated, short of turning him out into society. It’s an experiment.

When he kills again, you know the experiment failed.

I don’t know much about the innards of the penal system, but my guess is that most attempts at rehabilitation are futile, especially when dealing with a true sociopath…and I’d also guess that there’s not a great deal of resources going into identifying true sociopaths from, for lack of a better term, common criminals.

What pains me is the young killers; those who for whatever reason had an inadequate upbringing, through no fault of their own, never developed a sense of right and wrong. Then they get involved in a capital crime, and are pretty much lost from that point on.

No excuses for such behavior, but you gotta feel something for those who didn’t get even the basics of morality growing up. Sad.

 

[TOP]

A sociopath…is very often a psychopath, and quite often these people manifest their antisocial behaviors through violence. Ted Bundy comes to mind, as does Eileen Wournos, and any number of others.

Where murderers who have committed 1st degree premeditated murder are concerned…their sentences should not be concerned with rehabilitation or salvaging them. The sentences meted out to these individuals are geared to protect society from them. You cannot redeem a premeditated killer, any more than you can rehabilitate a serial killer or pedophile. They need to be put away for the rest of their natural lives, or put down.

Would you prefer to have a cold blooded killer sell a line of “Gee, I’m sorry, and I won’t do it again…” and get paroled just to kill another innocent person? Sorry, no thanks. Lock em up, keep em locked up. And if they are determined to be mentally ill, there are facilities for them as well.

So to you a sociopath = a “cold blood killer”. Your wrong. Plain and simple. I did not state my opinions on locking up killers at all, but was defining what a sociopath was. So your assumption that I feel we should let killers go free is again, WRONG, plain and simple. Tim

 

[Wolseley]

But with mandatory sentences cases aren’t considered on their own merits. Judges have had discretion taken away from them and juries are not allowed to know what the result of a guilty verdict will be.

So what are the merits of this case? The article doesn’t say. What was the motive for this murder? Kicks? Revenge? Obtaining money for dope? Teenage pique because the grownups wouldn’t let them watch the latest episode of Desperate Housewives? What? And what possible motive could be considered a reasonable one to murder someone in cold blood?

What do I propose? I don’t know. I do know that certain things are wrong.

Like murder?

Sentencing people to life as “habitual” felons is wrong. Certainly criminal history should be considered in whether to sentence someone to the minimum or the max for each offence. But life for “habituals” is jailing people for what they are rather than what they have done, the same as the USSR sending “antisocial elements” to the Gulag.
Likewise keeping people in prison for fear they will re-offend, as with these teenagers is, in effect, punishing them for crimes they haven’t committed.

That’s noble, but I doubt that it would cut a lot of ice with the family of the next person they murdered.

I know other countries have lower crime rates without keeping such a huge portion of the population locked up.

Yes, and there’s a real good reason why.

I had a professor in college who told me a story once, about he and his wife taking a vacation to a certain Caribbean country, which I will not name except to say that it was not Cuba. He got into a conversation with one of the natives, and the talk turned to prisons, and the native said that Americans were fools in the way they put people in jail.

“In our prisons,” the native said, "the prisoners don’t get excercise periods, or air conditioning, or piped-in music, mail, visitors, magazines, or flush toilets. They sleep on a straw pallet on the floor and they get fed once a day, and if they step out of line, the guards beat the snot out of them. When people get out of one of our prisons, they don’t want to go back. They’ll do anything to avoid going back. And most people, knowing what prison will be like if they go there, will think twice before the do something that might land them in prison.

“That’s why we don’t have a lot of people in our prisons, and we never have repeat offenders. But you Americans? You don’t have any idea what you’re doing with prisons. You don’t know how to put people in jail.”

Now, I am certainly not advocating that we should establish a banana republic-style prison system in the United States, but you have to admit that the guy had a point. If you’re a strung-out druggie living in an alley and eating garbage, you’re better off in one of our prisons that out of it. Maybe what we should be doing is something that will make people want to stay out of our prisons to begin with.

 

[Newbie2]

Where murderers who have committed 1st degree premeditated murder are concerned…their sentences should not be concerned with rehabilitation or salvaging them. The sentences meted out to these individuals are geared to protect society from them. You cannot redeem a premeditated killer, any more than you can rehabilitate a serial killer or pedophile. They need to be put away for the rest of their natural lives, or put down.

And if they are determined to be mentally ill, there are facilities for them as well.

Hmmm. That’s an awfully broad brush you paint with there, pardner. Got any personal experience with rehabilitation of criminals or is this simply your opinion?

Premeditated killers, pedophiles and serial killers are all doomed then?

While I agree that yes, society needs to be protected from these folks, which involves incarceration, denying that any of them can be rehabilitated seems contrary to what Christ taught.

I have no experience with it, but I’m sure it’s difficult to tell which of these such criminals can possibly be turned around and when they might be ready to safely be reintroduced into society.

But automatic life sentences for them all, or have them “put down” like a rabid animal seems to be a rather sweeping position to take.

 

[Yerusalyim]

Rehabilitate in prison if possible, BUT LEAVE THEM IN PRISON. There are some crimes, such as this one, that are so horrendous that the punishment should be LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE. Under Old Testament Law these people would have been stoned or hung…under our civil laws, the punishment for this crime is fitting. What would Jesus do? Attempt to rehabilitate, but leave them in Prison.

 

[pnewton]

Hmmm. That’s an awfully broad brush you paint with there, pardner. Got any personal experience with rehabilitation of criminals or is this simply your opinion?

I do. For those that don’t, rest assured that there are those out there that will continue to pose a threat to others, prison or no prison. The youngest I have known such a one is 15. I have met several in their twenties. The last thing we want is for these people to be released into society. The odds of them killing another human being are high enough even with them locked up.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Before we start locking up everyone with social issues, lets see what we are dealing with.
so·ci·o·path (sō’sē-ə-păth’, -shē-)
n.
One who is affected with a personality disorder marked by antisocial behavior.

Lets stick with violent criminals and not include people with personality disorders.

If you meet a man who flies an airplane, you know he’s a pilot – because that’s what pilots do.

If you meet someone who commits a crime like this, you know he’s a sociopath – because that’s what sociopaths do.