Should Children Who Committ Crimes Do Adult Time?
 

As usual, I was watching a cable news show last night. One of the topics up for discussion was whether or not 13-year old Nathaniel Brizzel, who shot and killed his middle school teacher in Florida, should be put on trial as an adult. Some guests stated that he should and others said he does not have the mental capacity of an adult. Nathaniel's attorney kept bringing up the fact that he was an honor roll student and never had any prior problems at school or with the law.

If he is tried as a juvenile, then he will be released at age 21 if I'm not mistaken. Otherwise, he will receive life in prison without parole. His mother believes he should be tried as the juvenile that he is. She does not think the state of Florida should use her son as an example.

I understand that he is 13 and this is not the life his parents wanted him to have. But at 13 years old or even younger, we know right from wrong and there are consequences to be dealt with. He says that it was an accident, but yet bragged to his friends before the incident that he would be "all over the news." Would anyone like to share their views?

I think that if you do a crime of this magnitude and you are a juvenile, too bad! Like you said, soror, we are taught right from wrong at a very, very early age. This does not come about at 11, 12, 13 years old. So, this kid and any other kid who decides to do a crime like murder, rape, or anything along those lines should be tried as an adult.

I just knew my sorors and friends would have something to say about this! I caught the tail end of BET Tonight last night, and the boy's father called in to the show, saying that the prosecutor and those who support trying his son as an adult "don't know all the facts.." What other facts would mitigate the ones we already know? We know that his irresponsible, rage-filled son obtained a gun with the express purpose to do violence to his teacher. What else is there to know? That he didn't MEAN for it to go off? Why did he leave school and then return with the gun? I'm sick of people making excuses for their bad parenting and saying the system is railroading their children. If he was five, maybe, but 13? Come on! He's old enough (and supposedly intelligent enough) to understand what he did. Too bad his parents and others (who are looking to make a buck off this) don't understand what he did as well. If I hear one more person say "I know what he did was wrong, BUT..." I'm going to lose my mind!

If he had killed my mother, father, husband, sister, etc. I would want justice, and letting the killer out at 21 (only eight years from now) wouldn't feel like justice to me. Why is it in these situations, the killer and their family gets more attention than the victim and their family's pain?

Yes, blacks are victims of a corrupt system, but that fact shouldn't be used to explain away EVERY unconscionable act committed by one of our own. It teaches young people that no matter what they do, "the man" is gonna hold them down, so shoot, why not do whatever you want to do? WHAT KIND OF PEOPLE ARE WE RAISING OUR YOUNG TO BE? IS THIS WHAT OUR ANCESTORS FOUGT AND DIED FOR? TO MAKE "EXCUSES"?

Yall, I'm sorry for the long post, but that child's father almost made me cuss last night with that mess! Let me sit down somewhere!

DG, you echoed my thoughts exactly. Well-said, soror.

I also agree, at age 13 I never would have considered killing ANYONE. My parents taught me about love not hate and putting me in Sunday School while they went to church was the best thing they could have ever done for me. It gave me a chance to learn about God and the teachers taught me on my level. 13 is a very mature age even though it may not seem like it to us. I knew a lot at age 13 and I feel that since he did the crime he must pay the time. How are people going to learn the difference between right and wrong if they never get punished.

Ladies I totally agree... I did not see BET but I heard something about this subject on 1010 wins this morning, and I was outraged that some people believe that Nathaniel Brizzel should not be tried as an adult. I almost cried sitting in my car at the light this morning. I thought of all the teachers I know (now and when I was young) and killing a teacher would never have crossed my mind back then, I might have wanted my teacher to get hit by a car :) but that is a different story - I would not try and commit the act myself. I was crying and I was upset because someone has just lost a husband, a father, a friend, a brother due to this jerky 13 year olds actions and they (his lawyers and parents) have the nerve to say he should not be treated like an adult. Well, since he was man enough to pick up the gun, better yet point it and shoot another human then he SHOULD BE man enough to serve the time. I just don't see how this situation could go any other way!

Sorors,
I missed the topic on BET. However, living in Florida the topic has been on the nightly news and in newspapers since the incident. I agree totally that a 13 year old knows the difference between right and wrong I also believe that at 13 a person knows that death is a permanent situation and that shooting someone can seriously injure or and kill that person. I know the parents are torn apart inside (I know I would be). I wonder have those parents considered what the teacher's wife is going through...not to mention the confussion of the young children who are wondering "when will daddy be home?"
It wasn't like the 13 yr old beat up another kid after school. He took a man's life! It is a no win situation many lives have been destroyed and it is a shame.

I have really mixed emotions about this topic. While I think it is deplorable what this young man did, my heart can't help but go out to him. I have a difficult time believing that someone can be innately evil. I think that this is a troubled young man who, unfortunately, will not benefit from being locked in a cage for the rest of his life. I always try to take into consideration why people do things, not what they do. I've always been taught that hurt people hurt people. I have a real soft spot in my heart for children, especially black children, because I think that we, as the adults, are failing them.

Now don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that this child (since that's what he is) should get a slap on the wrist and sent home. I do believe that he should undergo some serious mental treatment, preferably in the confines of a secured facility for the rest of his life. He's obviously suffering from some type of mental disorder and should not be allowed to roam the streets. I just don't agree with the idea of simply throwing someone away for life or playing God and deciding who is fit to live.

I know you're probably saying, "Well, what about the victim and his family", or "What if it was one of your family members?" I would still say the same thing. I would be devastated, but I would still have compassion for the perpetrator. My heart goes out to that family and their loss is inconceivable, but my faith in all that is good and my love for God and my fellow brethren supersedes my human reactions.

Judge, lest ye be judged.

Vengeance is mine, says the Lord.

its hard to say a 13 year old should be locked away in a prison with grown men for the rest of his life, i doubt much good will come from that, a child can with love and proper guidance often be rehabilitated and change, however since he knew death was final as someone stated, and that it was wrong (or should have) then he must suffer the consequences of the law (but counseling and love must be a part of that, not just prison walls). If this is the case then what is the cut off age? what has happened in terms of sentencing with other similiar cases, does anyone know? its painful anyway you slice it.

Although I do not practice criminal law, I have some knowledge of the issue. This is not the procedure in 100% of the cases because some states have mandatory guidelines, but I think this is the general scenario: In most states the cut-off age is 16 or 18. However, when the crime is of a particularly heinous nature, both the judge and the prosecutor may have the opportunity to transfer the case to adult court. There is usually a review or court-imposed standard that the case has to meet before transfer. Murder cases are almost always transfered unless the accused is too young to understand what death is and that it is a permanent situation.
For example, several years ago two young brothers (somewhere between 7 and 9)in the midwest basically kidnapped their 6 year-old schoolmate, took him to the 5th floor of an abandoned building and pushed him out. Their lawyer claimed that they didn't know that the 6 year-old would die. The court found otherwise and reasoned that most kids know at four or five that the Road Runner/Wile E. Coyote situation is a cartoon and that real people don't come back after falling off of a cliff or being bull-dozed. Kids that are of an age to understand the cause and effect of their own pain, are surely able to understand when they cause pain to others.
Sorry so long I hope that this clarifies how the courts go about deciding between juvenile and adult cases. The rehabilitation v. incarceration argument is another situation all together.

Hello Ladies of AKA,
I would just like to add my opinion to this topic.
Discogoddess, I also watched BET last night and saw what you saw. I agree with you. I also wanted to add that some people said that Nathaniel just "snapped". His father said that is not true. Well, if the child didn't just snap, then there had to be some signs of unhappiness or trouble that someone (especially his parents, since they know him so well) should have picked up on. My own mother can tell when I have something heavy on my mind, so I'm sure there were signs. Just with those Columbine students,(sorry to get off the subject), their parents noticed their odd behavior/dress but thought it was just a phase and didn't want to harass them. Well, sometimes parents have to get nosey. Not with just the child, but the teachers, friends, and other relatives. I hate to see this child be tried as an adult, but enough is enough. There is another mother that doesn't have her child to see everyday, as Nathaniel's mom does. At 13 years old, I'm sure he's been to at least one funeral to know that death is final.

[This message has been edited by c&c1913 (edited June 14, 2000).]

I haven't followed the case very closely but glimpsed it on the news. Personally, I feel he should be tried as an adult. He is at an age where he knew that if he killed this teacher, this human being, then he was taking another person's life and did not have the capability to give it back. I would certainly like to know why he committed such a heinous crime, but as one that has previously worked in chlidhood education, I would not want him back on the streets.

------------------
>>>"Many women do noble things, but you surpass them all."
Charm is deceptive and beauty is fleeting, but a woman who fears the Lord is to be praised... Proverbs 31:29-30

thanks legal diva for your legal input.

I feel that if you are willing to make adult decisions, you should be willing to suffer adult consequences. It is a pity that young kids today have the audacity to actually think or even act upon such crimes. It is obvious that they have no fear in their hearts whatsoever. Maybe, when they start to see and realize that such heavy crimes also carry the weight of a heavy punishment, some type of fear could be put back in their hearts.

[This message has been edited by jydakiss (edited June 15, 2000).]

Has anyone been following the trial? I heard on the news last night that his mother now wants the plea bargain for 25 years with a chance for parole, but the prosecutor said too late.

You have kids out there who grew up in abusive environments, are homeless and drug afflicted. These kids usually lead a life of crime and end up committing murder. Here you have a young man who was an honor role student, had excellent attendance and friends. If we are sympathetic to this boy with supportive and loving parents, who killed for no apparent reason, then God help us all.

I can understand where everyone is coming from by saying that the child should be tried as an adult. But what some people don't realize is that prison makes a person worse off than he/she ever was. I knew of a person, something like a friend of an associate, who went to prison for about 3 years. When he got out, he was totally unlike the person he was when he went in. Now, from what I have heard since I have moved away, is that he is now serving a life sentence for being a habitual offender. I have always thought that prison was punishment but also rehabilitation. Why is it now like that? Why have some people become so 'institutalized'? Sorry to digress off the current thread, but my mind wonders about these types of things...

I'm sorry ladies, but I don't believe that a child should serve life behind bars. I understand the old saying *U lie in the bed U made* but come on, Its a child for petes sake. He made a mistake. he wasn't thinking as an adult but the child he is. I can't go into details like i want to about this topic because i am at work(in the file closet with my boss labtop, http://www.greekchat.com/forums/ubb/wink.gif but later on I will be back on here with more about my views and why i believe this is wrong. Bye

The things we do to post on GC, but I can't talk. I am in the middle of taking my C programming final. http://www.greekchat.com/forums/ubb/redface.gif



------------------
Jade is the green of my eyes; Rein is the love that flows deeply within...

I understand your position. Looking at this case reminds me of the situation when the young black man/teenager killed the little girl (also, in Florida I believe). I keep thinking that these two young men are boys trapped in a man's body. Their psychological development is not up to speed with what we think it should be.

I believe this to be true because of the way that they talk and their gestures. Granted, it could be an act for their defense in the courtroom but in my opinion, they look as if they were not all there. Please tell me that someone understands what I'm trying to say?!

I seem to not be able to clearly articulate what I'm trying to express today!


[This message has been edited by Ania (edited May 10, 2001).]

[This message has been edited by Ania (edited May 10, 2001).]

I just read on the net that he was convicted of second-degree murder. So, the prosecution did not get the first-degree murder conviction they were looking for.

he received 2 guilty verdicts, second degree murder and second degree aggravated assault. His sentencing is on June 29.

They said he will probably get 25 years minimum. It can carry a sentence of 25 years to life.

I am not really sure what my stance on all this is but I almost cried thinking about how this boy will be at least 40 when he gets out. I know that he still has his life as opposed to the man he killed. But sometimes I wonder if some of these kids resort to this from lack of parenting, guidance and love at home. Sure they know right from wrong and that death is final, but I wonder if they've been taught any other way to handle their emotions or deal with problems. I only say this because I believe most parents today are crappy. They want to have children, feed and cloth them but that's it. They are selfish and do not want to put their own desires and feelings aside for their children's well-being which is absolutely wrong. I just know of a lot of kids that while they know right from wrong, they still do wrong because they just want attention any way they can get it or they're just so confused by all of their emotions and they have no one to help them through it so they do whatever. I just feel for everyone involved.

Ok with that logic, since girls mature faster than boys anyways a 13 or 14 year old girl who has sex with a 20 or older male is not being raped because she has the mental capacity to make that decision as an adult. Gee that statement I just made is ludicrous. Just about as unbelievable is the fact that a 13 or 14 year old male has the mental ability of an adult. This is not justifying what he did. The child did a crime and he should be punished and rehabilitated.

Those are two entirely different situations. You cant really compare.

Granted, at 13 or 14 the brain is NOT fully developed. But at 13 and 14 you are fully aware of what death is, and what murder is. 13 or 14 year old girls in this society may very well grow up not understanding sex and what sex isignifies- especially girls that grow up without a father. Hell, I know 30 and 40 year olds who still have that problem.

That boy went and got a gun, and deliberately took that man's life. He knew what it meant and he made the decision. He now needs to take the adult consequences.

I think that what you are saying is ridiculous. I agree a 13 or 14 year girl does not know the full implications of her actions so why would you think a 13 or 14 year old boy would know the full implications of his actions. It is all about the ability to make adult decisions and 13 or 14 year olds do not have the experience to make adult decisions.

I totally disagree. I have to go with lovelyivy on this one. If you survey a room of 13 and 14 year old girls as to their knowledge about sex, I guarantee you that the majority of them will be sorely misinformed. (As are many ADULT females, as was previously stated). HOWEVER, I don't think you could even find a 5 year old that thinks it's okay to kill someone. Some might argue that a teenager might understand that the act is wrong but not fully consider the ramifications of it... but the fact that he bragged about being all over the news (didn't someone post that earlier?) completely negates that defense as far as I'm concerned.

I resurected this old post because it was something that my collegues and I have been debating for a while. I work for a non-profit org that provides advocacy services for juvenile offenders, so our main goal is to have juvenile offenders released into the community with "services" in place to aid in their rehabilitation. I have been in this field for a while now suffice to say I dont believe in Prison as a means to rehabilitate kid or adults for that matter but thats a different subject. But then I came across this http://www.newsday.com/news/local/ne...,2160499.story and I have to say, I am at a loss. Does a story like this change your views on whether children should do adult time?

It is hard for me to say. I fear that putting the child in jail will only create a criminal for the society to deal with later. But the truth is putting them in the system will do this as well. The question we all need to ask, is there a better way? Helping our kids before they reach this point is the key to never having discussions like this. I wonder if something could have been done before it happened?

I go back and forth on this issue. Still, I lean more towards making them do adult time. I think when they are allowed to get around doing adult time, that injustice takes place. In particular I'm thinking about the Eve Carson case right now. From what I understand, the young man who actually killed her will get a less harsh penalty because he's not technically an adult. However, his accomplice will be getting an adult penalty. In situations like this, there is clearly a grave injustice taking place.

1. how old is said child at time of crime?
2. does said child have previous criminal history? if so, for what? if so, for how long?
3. if they have been in the juvenile system before, and have not been 'rehabilitated', put them in jail.

These issues aren't as cut and dry as we'd like them to be and we have to look at each case individually, I think.

These issues aren't as cut and dry as we'd like them to be and we have to look at each case individually, I think.[/quote]


I agree with you on that...but if we start looking at each case differently instead of setting a standard, doesnt that open the door for injustice? I say that after reading DeepImpact2's post. I dont think that it is fair that age plays a role in how much time one is given especially when their adult counterparts are not receiving any leniency for commiting the same crime.

Me neither. That is why I say fry him.

Laurent, I don't think so. Because they are children, their understanding of consequences and right and wrong are not fully developed, IN SOME CASES. Adults, presumably, know the difference AND understand the consquences. I'm looking at it in a very cut and dry sense, but we both know the real world is all kinds of gray.

You are right, the world is all kinds of gray, but when it comes to right and wrong there are no gray areas. Socially acceptable behavior is something that we learn at a very early age, so I dont fully buy into the belief that their understanding of right and wrong has not been fully developed. I guess I am kind of playingh devil's advocate here because I work with juvenile offenders, and my role is to advocate for their release back into society after they have commited delinquent acts, and after several years in this field, I can say that most, if not all, knew exactly what they were doing; knew it was wrong at the time; knew the consequences for their actions, but still committed the crime anyway.

An interesting aspect to this issue for me is the fact that the law recognizes in many cases that people of diminished capacity, e.g., folks with brain damage or some sort of mental illness have less responsibility for their criminal actions.

Teenagers have such an infirmity. We know that kids lack a fully developed frontal lobe -- something which is supposed to inhibit impulsive behavior when working at adult capacity.

Should not the law then take into account the fact that as to crimes of impulse, these kids truly are not wired the way society expects them to be wired? Or do we ignore that because the victim and society demand justice for the act and would rather not take into account all of the things which caused the bad act so long as it is voluntary.

The correct answer, I think, when it comes to juvenile services is that we need to expend a lot more resources there if we want to even have a prayer of a positive income for any significant portion of the kids in the system. The trouble is that we're already spread so thin and selling the public on services for juvenile delinquents is not an easy thing even though in the long run, it's probably one of the most efficient uses of public money we could ever make (as a lot of money spent on intervention right now beats the cost to society of a career criminal).

Well said!