Having the older kid give up his room is just asking for trouble.

A capital offense by definition is an offense for which the death penalty (aka capital punsihment, from the Latin capitus, head, as in "off with") can be imposed. Just sayin'. ;)

Remorse for what? He's trying to get off, if he shows 'remorse' isn't that a hint at guilt? How would that help his defense?

If what I'm gathering is correct, and the real issue is that he demonstrates no sorrow that the father's fiancée and her unborn child are dead rather than feeling no remorse for killing them, then we seem to have a word-usage problem. The media uses the word "remorse," but remorse means sorrow for one's own wrongdoing. You don't feel remorse for something someone else did; you feel sorrow, sadness or the like.

Like you said, he's pleading not guilty -- a right guaranteed him by the Constitution. Why would he be expected to show remorse for something that he says he didn't do and that the government hasn't yet proven in court that he did do?

^^^^

Right, and I think the answer might be, because it's the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.

Right. What if he really didn't do it, but still doesn't feel sorrow for their deaths? Not saying that it's right or that it doesn't mean that he may have deeper issues, but will they punish him because he doesn't feel bad that they are dead? They have already established that he didn't like her or the idea of having a new baby sibling, maybe he just doesn't care.

;) LOL

I keep reading these police accounts of what supposedly happened here and don't understand at all how they have so many details unless there was a witness. How can you say something like "He hid the gun under a blanket so the 7 year old wouldn't see it". So either, the police are making HUGE assumptions or this kid talked some or the 7 year old saw the whole thing?

In any case, there is a reason that 11 year olds are not considered adults. I said this with Nathanial Abraham (who was 11 when tried as an adult in Michigan) and I maintain the same opinion today. If they are adults, treat them like adults. If they are children, treat them like children. If they aren't old enough to vote or drive, don't be trying them as adults. How can we constantly be moving the bar of "adulthood" based on what's convenient at the time?

Thanks. I wasn't sure of the way it works in other states, like if anyone who commits first degree murder qualifies for death row.

;) This is a Wikipedia moment: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment

lol

Excuse me, but guilt has not yet been determined. Even if Mumia did do it, your response is incredibly rude. Threads like this are supposed to encourage RESPECTFUL debate. Responding like this won't get anyone to listen to your opinion. Instead, you'll simply be discounted to a racist loon.

insaneclown = the constantly banned madmax

He logs on to try to be rude and disrespectful. Shame on you for actually reading his posts, let alone responding. :)

From what I've read, the seven year old was questioned by the police about what happened, and she was the one who said that her soon-to-be stepbrother had a blanket wrapped around something and told her that her mother wasn't making breakfast. He also didn't want the fiancee & her daughter moving in, let alone having a baby around. Throw in the fingerprint evidence, and it's going to take one fantastic attorney to use anything but his age to get this kid off.

As for remorse, guilty or not, psychiatric reports from both sides say that he has no remorse that the fiancee & the baby are dead.

I stand by my original statement that we need to have a halfway prison of sorts, for the hardcore juvenile offender. A kid who kills shouldn't be with truants, nor should a kid who kills be with adult offenders.

Somewhat relevant to the discussion at hand, I wanted to post this a few months ago after first reading it but never did.
http://www.freep.com/article/2010022...or-killer-kids