News Fifth Graders Charged With Murder Conspiracy

Click For Summary
Two boys, aged 10 and 11, are facing felony charges for conspiracy to commit murder after allegedly plotting to kill a classmate deemed "annoying." The prosecutor acknowledges the rarity of trying such young individuals but emphasizes the premeditated nature of their actions and the danger they pose. Discussions highlight concerns about their emotional development, lack of remorse, and the potential influence of violent media on their behavior. Many argue for counseling over incarceration, suggesting that rehabilitation could be more beneficial than punitive measures. The case raises significant questions about childhood violence, parental responsibility, and the effectiveness of the justice system in addressing such issues.
  • #31
With regard to the boys' "moral values", an appropriate professional would have to probe 'why' the boys believe it is acceptable to kill another human for whatever reason, including where or how did they develop that notion. A trickier question would be - would they likely do it again? However, one is faced with uncertainty in the answers. These are more or less legal questions, as opposed to scientific questions like those in physics or chemistry.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
Astronuc said:
These are more or less legal questions, as opposed to scientific questions like those in physics or chemistry.
I guess I've been to PF too much. Just sayin'.

Yea. One reason I'm not a lawyer.
 
  • #33
I believe the purpose of incarceration is not punishment, which amounts to old testament revenge, but protection of society through either rehabilitation or isolation(or termination) of bad actors.

Legally can we imprison somebody because of crimes they might commit ?
Or must wait for them to act ?

That's why Conspiracy laws were written.
What's the threshold where you lock somebody away?
Hinckley, Loughner, Lanza come to mind.
I need to ponder this before I get called to such a jury.
 
Last edited:
  • #34
dlgoff said:
I guess I've been to PF too much. Just sayin'.

Yea. One reason I'm not a lawyer.
Well, in theory, science and the law are about the pursuit of truth, and they are human endeavors that rely upon the integrity of the individuals who practice science or law.
 
  • #35
jim hardy said:
Legally can we imprison somebody because of crimes they might commit ?
Or must wait for them to act ?
In the UK, conspiracy to commit some types of crime is an offense (but it may be difficult to prove).

Once somebody has been convicted of something, then the UK has the concept of "indefinite sentences" - i.e. you don't get released until you convince the authorities that you are no longer a danger to society. This has been used in cases where the "standard" sentence for an offense would be only a few months.

The other alternative is action on the grounds of mental health - containment in a secure hospital. But that is problematic, in that something has to happen to make the authorities get involved, even if the "something" isn't actually criminal.

I need to ponder this before I get called to such a jury.

Not really. I've done jury service. The jury's task is to consider a particular case on the merits of the evidence, not construct a general philosophical theory of the meaning of "justice". (And in the UK, the jury only decides on guilt or innocence, it isn't involved in sentencing as I believe happens in the US)
 
  • #36
@ChiralWaltz - You fool. Why did you be honest with her? You should have known world is unfair by then. :P

A killer will be killer. There's no stopping that. Censor Hollywood and all these will stop.