Worse than medieval?!

[Sriram]

Hi everyone,

An old case...but nevertheless....

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/08/11/us/8-year-old-boy-key-west-arrest-trnd/index.html

***********
Police officers at a Florida elementary school arrested an 8-year-old boy who had allegedly hit a teacher -- only to realize the boy's wrists were too small for the handcuffs.

On Tuesday she filed a federal lawsuit, claiming that the officers used excessive force, that school officials failed to intervene, and that the city and school district violated the Americans with Disabilities Act. The lawsuit says the boy has special needs.
But in a statement to the Miami Herald on Monday, Key West Police Chief Sean T. Brandenburg said that his officers did nothing wrong and that they followed standard operating procedures.

The mother, Bianca N. Digennaro, said in a Zoom press conference Tuesday that her son was arrested, taken to jail, finger-printed, DNA-swabbed and had his mugshot taken that day.

***********

A terrible way to treat a 8 year old. I don't know how it is in the UK. 

In India it is the opposite. Anyone younger than 18 can literally get away with murder. Some cruel 16 year old's have  spent 3 years in a juvenile home and then left free.

Any views?

Sriram

[Harrowby Hall]

The age of criminal responsibility in the UK is 10, Sriram. My personal view is that this is too low.

The most notable criminal case involving 10 year-olds was that of the killers of Jamie Bulger. Although it is essential that action must be taken when children are involved in serious offences, I think that this case highlighted the deficiencies in the justice system's approach to young offenders.

The two offenders were tried in an adult court following the procedures of adult trials. Their transportation to the court was a daily public event - crowds (and press photographers) gathered to observe this event daily. The boys were identified when being sentenced and (although they were given new identities) have been the subject of much gutter press activity since. The press has given the murdered boy's mother a permanent public platform since.

[Robbie]

I agree with you, Harrowby. Ten is far too young and the handling of the James Bulger case was a disgrace.

Treatment and rehabilitation of young offenders is generally a shambles and always has been.

I understand the Scandinavians have better, more effective methods.

[Roses]

I think a child of ten does know the difference between right and wrong and should take responsibility for their actions. I am glad those evil Bulger monsters were locked away.

[Stranger]

As Harrowby said the age of criminal responsibility in the UK is 10 (well, in England, Wales, and NI, there are more complicated rules in Scotland). That means that nobody under 10 can be arrested or charged. I also agree that that is too low, although younger offenders (under 18) are generally treated differently (Age of criminal responsibility).

In the US it's down to the states, and many don't actually set one (Florida included). For federal crimes it's 11. See Defense of infancy for a country by county breakdown.

[Nearly Sane]

I think a child of ten does know the difference between right and wrong and should take responsibility for their actions. I am glad those evil Bulger monsters were locked away.

Should a child of that age be able to consent to sex? If not, then you are accepting that in some senses the child is not fully capable of 'taking responsibility'.

[Roses]

Should a child of that age be able to consent to sex? If not, then you are accepting that in some senses the child is not fully capable of 'taking responsibility'.

A child of 10 should know that having sex at that age is WRONG.

[Gordon]

I think a child of ten does know the difference between right and wrong and should take responsibility for their actions.

I somehow doubt that a child who has not yet finished primary school could be expected to take full responsibility for their actions in any significant sense, since if that were the case their parents and/or other adults who were caring for them would then be able to offload their own responsibilities in respect of the child: I suspect that no responsible adult would even contemplate that course, and I further doubt the law would look kindly on them if they tried to.

[Nearly Sane]

A child of 10 should know that having sex at that age is WRONG.

But why is it wrong for a child of 10? I would say it's because we don't think children of 10 can give a fully thought out consent to the act. In that case we are already treating them as not the same as adults in terms of taking responsibility.
Also one of the reasons why we have an age of consent is that we think it's too easy for predators to persuade children that  sex is not wrong.

[Outrider]

I think part of the issue, as with so much in the world these days, is the idea that there's a simple 'line in the sand' point at which these things kick in, and it's appropriate for everyone.  There are ten year olds out there who know exactly what they're doing, and ten year olds out there who would be led astray in moments; the proportions change, but that's the same situation at 8 years old, at 12, 14, 16, even at 18 there are a few who haven't got there yet - that's obviously discounting the people with mental states and conditions which mean they'll likely never fully understand, but the system has a mechanism for determining if they're competent after the fact.

At various stages you can understand that things are wrong without necessary fully grasping the depth or subtleties of some of it, whilst you can have no idea that something else is wrong, and the specific combinations are a result of your development and upbringing - you can't presume all children will grasp one thing before another.

That's coupled with the US tendency to turn some of their police forces into paramilitary organisations in this specific case which makes it distasteful.

As to the James Bulger case, I find in some ways that's an interesting example so far as this discussion is concerned: Mrs O. watched a documentary on it some years ago (I apologise, I have no idea that channel or the name) and it included excerpts from the interviews with the two perpetrators.  Quite apart from how distraught the whole thing made me, as the parent of (at the time) two children with another on the way, it was apparent to me that one of the two was absolutely horrified at what had happened, and the other was more concerned about trying to make sure that blame fell on the other: both of those reactions are a clear understanding that what was done was wrong.

O.

[Roses]

But why is it wrong for a child of 10? I would say it's because we don't think children of 10 can give a fully thought out consent to the act. In that case we are already treating them as not the same as adults in terms of taking responsibility.
Also one of the reasons why we have an age of consent is that we think it's too easy for predators to persuade children that  sex is not wrong.

Well I certainly knew it was wrong when I was that age.

[jeremyp]

A child of 10 should know that having sex at that age is WRONG.

I'm pretty sure that, at age 10, I had a full understanding of what murder is and that it is wrong. I am also pretty sure that I had no idea what sex is. On the other hand, I probably knew ten year olds for whom that situation was reversed.

I find your stance somewhat naive.

[Roses]

I remember a girl bringing the 'Lady Chatterley's Lover novel' into school when I was ten with all the salacious bits underlined, which my classmates and I lapped up . I didn't dare tell my parents as I knew a thrashing would ensue for having read it.

[Udayana]

I'd agree that the way the way the child was treated was medieval.

ISTM that, mostly, the way people behave has nothing to do with understanding "right" from "wrong", but is a reflection of the society they grow up in -  they then go on to reinforce those societal characteristics in various kinds of feedback loops until the whole lot collapses.

Also, there seems to be some equivalence between "taking responsibility" and being punished for ones actions, that I don't think is required.

[Robbie]

I've been watching 'The Victim' on iplayer; it put me in mind of this thread. I wndered if any others had seen, especially in Scotland as it's a Scottish production:
https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2019/apr/08/the-victim-review-grab-a-drink-and-settle-in-for-a-gripping-vicious-thriller

[Aruntraveller]

No approach in cases like these will ever be perfect. I was reminded of this case and the response in Norway to it, so looked it up to share it.

If you read the article it is clear that the parents involved feel that they have in some ways been ignored but they still think that Norway's approach to this issue was better than England's approach to the Bulger case.

https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/2010/mar/20/norway-town-forgave-child-killers

[Roses]

No approach in cases like these will ever be perfect. I was reminded of this case and the response in Norway to it, so looked it up to share it.

If you read the article it is clear that the parents involved feel that they have in some ways been ignored but they still think that Norway's approach to this issue was better than England's approach to the Bulger case.

https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/2010/mar/20/norway-town-forgave-child-killers

A shocking story!

[Steve H]

Well I certainly knew it was wrong when I was that age.

Your favourite logical fallacy - generalising from a particular instance.

[Roses]

Your favourite logical fallacy - generalising from a particular instance.

If children are brought up with appropriate discipline from birth they will know right from wrong at an early age.

[Steve H]

If children are brought up with appropriate discipline from birth they will know right from wrong at an early age.

Your other favourite bad debating habit - making statements of opinion with no evidence or arguments to support them.

[Nearly Sane]

If children are brought up with appropriate discipline from birth they will know right from wrong at an early age.

They'll understand that there are things they shouldn't do because otherwise they will be 'punished' but again we have a number of things we do not allow children/people to take responsibility for until they reach a certain age such as driving, drinking, working, sex. Unless you think those age limits should be removed then you are accepting that there is a difference in understanding about what taking responsibility means.

[Roses]

Your other favourite bad debating habit - making statements of opinion with no evidence or arguments to support them.

I provided evidence of your bad spelling yesterday, so there!

[Roses]

They'll understand that there are things they shouldn't do because otherwise they will be 'punished' but again we have a number of things we do not allow children/people to take responsibility for until they reach a certain age such as driving, drinking, working, sex. Unless you think those age limits should be removed then you are accepting that there is a difference in understanding about what taking responsibility means.

My husband and I kept an eye on what our children were up to, as all good parents should do. We had certain rules, which we expected them to obey for their safety. We vetted their friends and their friends' parents. A wise move, especially when we discovered that one father was touching his daughters inappropriately. We got the social services involved, the children were removed and sent to live with their mother.

We also ensured our children had a lot of fun and interesting experiences.

We couldn't have done too badly as they maintain they enjoyed their childhood. Our two married daughters are excellent parents and their children have made them proud.

[Nearly Sane]

My husband and I kept an eye on what our children were up to, as all good parents should do. We had certain rules, which we expected them to obey for their safety. We vetted their friends and their friends' parents. A wise move, especially when we discovered that one father was touching his daughters inappropriately. We got the social services involved, the children were removed and sent to live with their mother.

We also ensured our children had a lot of fun and interesting experiences.

We couldn't have done too badly as they maintain they enjoyed their childhood. Our two married daughters are excellent parents and their children have made them proud.

Which is lovely to hear but essentially irrelevant to the point that unless you think that the age limits should be removed then you are accepting that there is a difference in how you see the idea of 'taking responsibility' for younger people.

[Roses]

Which is lovely to hear but essentially irrelevant to the point that unless you think that the age limits should be removed then you are accepting that there is a difference in how you see the idea of 'taking responsibility' for younger people.

If a child commits a terrible crime like murder they are likely to be a danger to others, they should put in a unit where steps are taken to find out why they did it, and to try to reform them.