Should Children Who Committ Crimes Do Adult Time?

[AKAtude]

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?

[AKA2D '91]

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.

[Discogoddess]

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!

[AKAtude]

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

[niceone]

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.

[LadyAKA]

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!

[Catwoman]

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.

[SkeeBunny]

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.

[PositivelyAKA]

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.

[Legal Diva]

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).]

[tickledpink]

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

[PositivelyAKA]

thanks legal diva for your legal input.

[jydakiss]

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).]

[AKAtude]

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.