Slenderman Case

On the fateful day of July 28, 1999, six year old Tiffany Eunick was beaten to death by a 6 foot tall and 160 pound Lionel Tate. The autopsy report showed that Tate reportedly stomped on Eunick so hard her liver was lacerated, and the young girl sustained multiple bone fractures so severe that she was pronounced dead at the hospital hours later. Tate was controversially convicted of felony murder and thus sentenced to life in prison with no possibility of parole. Now why was this sentence so controversial? Because Lionel Tate was only twelve years old at the time of the murder. How do we determine mental competence of someone whose brain is still developing? How could someone who has not even finished puberty possibly understand the sever implications of such a brutal crime? How can we possibly try a juvenile as an adult when juveniles are proven to have diminished impulse control? This paper will discuss the history of charging juveniles of adults, discuss the issues that make this practice wrong while negating opposing arguments, and explain the various consequences that come with charging juvenile offenders as adults.

Too many minors have committed violent crimes and haven’t gotten the consequences they deserved. In Time magazine article, “Children without Pity” written by Nancy Traver, it shows how the crime rates are going up and many minors aren’t getting the consequence they need. Given the violence of their actions, minors who commit violent crimes should be tried as adults.

Should a teen who has committed a crime be charged as a juvenile and left to commit other crimes?

There are many controversial issues in our world today, and each of those issues is well debated by people who either support it or absolutely loathe it. One of those highly debated controversial issues is the juvenile death penalty. Since the Roper v. Simmons case in 2005, sentencing juveniles to death is considered illegal on the grounds that it violates the Eighth Amendment rights (Babcock 6). Although it is considered illegal in the United States, it is still a highly debated problem. There are people that believe the juvenile death penalty is an effective punishment and should not be illegal. On the other hand, many believe that the juvenile death penalty is an extreme punishment and should not be an option when it comes to sentencing juveniles. With such a critical issue, it is only considered fair to understand both sides opinions about the juvenile death penalty.

Gail Garinger, the author of “Juveniles Don’t Deserve Life Sentences,” argues that children should not be struck down for life because they commit the most vile and horrible crimes imaginable, based on the sole fact that they are still adolescents, and that they should be given the chance for parole and rehabilitation because they are not fully developed; therefore, in her article she shows exceptionally strong ethos to support her claim. Garinger first exposes her strong ethos by using the authority of the Supreme Court to exclaim why the youth shouldn’t be punished to a life sentence for homicide or manslaughter by saying, “the Supreme Court

In the so-called “Slender Man stabbing,” two 12-year-old girls told authorities that they had hatched a plot to kill a friend to prove their loyalty to Slender Man, a supernatural character created by an internet user that now features in many media including video games. They attacked the girl, stabbing her nineteen times. Luckily she survived the attack. The girls were charged with attempted murder in the firs degree. Did they really understand what they were doing? Some argue that juveniles in this age range are not able to fully differentiate fact from fiction or understand the consequences of their actions, yet the girls acknowledged that they knew Slender Man was a fantasy. Others argue that premeditated attempted murder is still just as severe regardless of the age of the perpetrators. It is

Today’s heated debate regarding the decision to try juveniles as adults has prompted individuals to construct opinionated and informational articles on the topic. The nation’s troubled youth are protected by groups that believe these offenders deserve rehabilitation and a chance to develop into a productive member of society. However, others believe that those committing certain heinous crimes should be tried as adults as a means to protect public safety, prevent second offenders, and “dispense justice in the form of punishment” (Aliprandini & Michael, 2016). Because these perspectives offer a reasonable and valid argument, juveniles responsible for major crimes

Supreme Court ruling Graham v. Florida (2010) banned the use of life without parole for juveniles who committed non-homicide crimes, and Roper v. Simmons (2005) abolished the use of the death penalty for juvenile offenders. They both argued that these sentences violated the 8th Amendment, which prohibits cruel and unusual punishment. While these landmark cases made great strides for the rights of minors passing through the criminal justice system, they are just the first steps in creating a juvenile justice system that takes into consideration the vast differences between adolescents and adults. Using sociological (Butler, 2010) and legal (Harvard Law Review, 2010) documents, this essay will explicate why the next such step to be taken is

If a ruthless fifteen-year old killed your mother, how would you want the inhumane murderer to be punished? How would you feel if you never got to see your mother alive again while her killer served only a short sentence before being released from jail? Clearly, one would want the worst violent punishment for that murderer to experience. We have to have a system where juveniles, even young juveniles, who commit extremely sophisticated violent criminalities, are not beyond the reach of the law. Truly, children are children. They are reckless and naïve when it comes to their actions, however if one commits a crime, moreover a violent crime, must be punished impartially according to what he/she deserves regardless of the age. Children who commit violent crimes should be held accountable for their actions and tried as adults.

These crimes are considered unethical resulting in fatal outcomes. Additionally, people tend to have compassion for juveniles when faced with criminal charges on account of age. Habitually children commit crimes since they believe their consequences are irrelevantly minor. This belief causes adolescence to continue their offences without thought of any consequences. In Baltimore police commissioner” Kevin Davis’ recent complaint that 90 percent of minors accused of serious crimes see their cases moved from adult court to the juvenile system” (Baltimore Sun 2017). Additionally, Davis believes juveniles accused of fatal crimes should become tried as adults which includes life without poral. Furthermore, the actions caused by juveniles may shape there lives

Simmons (2005), the Court ruled “that those under the age of 18 could not be sentenced to the death penalty, holding that the death penalty constituted cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the US Constitution when applied to juveniles (Liles & Moak, 2015, p. 78).” In Roper, the Court addressed issues of juvenile maturity, vulnerability, external influences, development, and culpability. In their holding, the Court cited inherent differences distinct to a juvenile, stating that the juvenile’s culpability must be considered in capital punishment decisions. The decision in Roper exclusively established differences between juveniles and adults for death penalty cases. At this time, juveniles could still be sentenced to life without parole.

Today’s court system comes with many crucial outcomes. The most questionable outcome is whether teens should be tried as adults. Many people are against the idea of teens being tried as adults in courts and argue that they are immature but, most teens had the mental capacity as an adult to plan a murder. Crimes that teens have committed have been in the felony level which is the type of crimes adults have made. Juvenile delinquents should be treated as adults in courts because they have committed unforgivable felonies; therefore, they should not have any leniency while in court because of their age.

The article “Crime, Culpability and the Adolescent Brain” by Mary Beckman, written in July of 2004 before the decision of the Supreme Court, discusses briefly the Roper v. Simmons case before delving into the scientific evidence of why an adolescent criminal cannot be on par with an adult criminal due to their brain structure. In turn, it was a composition of why scientists were hoping that the Supreme Court would consider the science behind the adolescent’s brain development before making their decision. The second article was written by David Stout the day that the Supreme Court made their decision, and it specifically discusses the background of the case and how the justices came up with their verdict. While some of the justices agreed with the scientific and psychological view, some also agreed that, logically, certain adolescents do deserve the death penalty if their crimes meet the standards of deserving the

Many young adolescents who have committed horrendous crimes have been a huge topic amongst the Supreme Court. Whether young adolescents are viewed as innocent, naive children to the public, this not changed the fact they can commit brutal crimes. In spite of the fact that adolescents have committed brutal crimes such as murder, one needs to understand that their brains are not as fully developed as an adult brain would be. Adolescents should not be trialed to a life sentence or attend adult prisons; however, they should be punished for their actions and undergo rehabilitation programs to help them be prepared to fit in with the rest of society.

  The punishment of juvenile criminals, specifically those between the ages of 13 and 18, in the event that they commit crimes of murder, is not severe enough. Minors between these critical ages in the teenage life who commit crimes of murder should be prosecuted as adults in all situations and locations.