The Supreme Court ruled yesterday that no prisoner can be executed if the crime was committed when they were younger than 18. The majority opinion reads like a bunch of warm and fuzzy pop psychology about peer pressure etc. I'm going with the (gasp!) conservative judges on this one. You cannot paint every juvenile killer with a broad stroke and say that none of them deserve the death penalty. Each case should be taken and considered on its own, without dismissing the case immediately becauase of their age. Some heinous, premeditated crimes have been committed by juveniles, and a jury should be able to make a determination as to whether or not the crime, and the facts behind it, rise to the level of capital punishment. We cannot just take the conversation out of the equation at all without allowing it to be considered.
Locally in Philadelphia, there is a case that has gone to trial of 3 boys and a girl conspiring to lure another "friend" to an alley with the promise of sex from the girl. The boy is then ambushed by the other boys and beaten to death with a hatchet and a rock, before the killers split up his hard earned money on drugs. One of the defendants stated in his confession that after they split up the cash they "partied without redemption". The attorneys for the killers have conceded that these boys are guilty of a crime of murder, but contend it was 3rd degree, not 1st degree capital murder. Now the jury won't have a chance to decide if the one defendant previously on trial for his life can get the chair or not.
More Ranting from The BM Rant