A twelve year old boy was found guilty of second degree murder this week. He was accused and found guilty of killing his father when the child was ten. The defense strategy failed. The prosecutors traced the child's history of violence back to kindergarten. According to a brief report in print media, during his kindergarten year, the boy stabbed a teacher with a pencil. The child was a victim himself of alcoholism during his pre-natal stage of life. Was he drinking or was the mother? The prosecutor's presented their case as the child knowing right from wrong so he was not mentally ill, although possibly abused. Abuse can be used in self defense cases but not planned murder.
Some would think that childhood events are developmental, kid's play, or not worth documenting. That is until an angry child, with access to anything that can be used as a weapon (in this case a gun), takes out vengeance. The defense argued that the child grew up in a violent and abusive environment where it was acceptable to kill people who are viewed as a threat.
The child evidently considered his father to be a threat. According to news reports on the trial, the child planned the murder and killed his father while the father slept on the couch. This child needed a child assault prevention program or at least someone to notice the warning signs.
Where did the child learn how to kill? Does it matter? The child was found guilty of second degree murder. What are we teaching our children? I know that we teach children on a regular basis that infants in the womb are to be killed if deemed a threat. As with the juveniles in a famous movie romantizing two violent gangs, this child has a social disease. And he caught it from the adults in his life.
Marian R. Carlino
January 14, 2013
