Quote:
|
Originally Posted by flat5
My choice of words were imprecise. I knew that when I wrote the post.
I don't know law or the best way to phrase my concern. I also know the DA is only considering weather to try the kid as an adult.
My question still stands. Why under the law is it possible for a DA to try a 14 year old as an adult? It just seems wrong to me. Where do you draw the line?
|
OK, let's assume that you're now leaving the US government out of this completely since they have absolutely nothing to do with this case (I make this caveat because that's the very first question in the OP).
Local governments get to set their own laws. It is the nature of the American system of government. That means that there is no one answer, although Cynthetiq pointed out the one that covers the vast majority of the answers.
There is a case in Loudon County, TN where a 15-year old brought a gun to a school and shot 3 people, killing an assistant prinicpal. He was tried as an adult because of the seriousness of the crime, but there was never doubt of guilt or innocence. If he were tried in juvenille court, he could only be kept incarcerated until he turned 21, and he would never have to report that he has a felony conviction. He was tried as an adult because it allowed him to be locked up longer.
Sometimes the crime is serious enough that the youthful criminal needs a longer sentence than is available in the juvenille court system. Lee Boyd Malvo, one of the Washington snipers, immediately springs to mind. He was 17 when he either shot or helped to shoot random people. He needs to spend more than 4 years in prison.