Shooting
Reno was shaken up by a school shooting this morning. One student at Pine Middle School was taken to the hospital with injuries to the arm and chest and another student suffered comparatively light shrapnel wounds. It sounds as though both victims are in good condition tonight, all things considered. Although the shooting happened at about 9 a.m. the school was not full; a mild snowfall last night and this morning had schools running on a delayed schedule. The shooter, an eighth-grader, is now in custody.
If you don't live in Reno, chances are you haven't heard about this and probably won't hear anything more about it after you get done reading this posting. I'm not sure which bothers me more--the fact that this happened, or the fact that it isn't really considered to be more than a regional news story because (luckily) no one was seriously hurt.
If you don't live in Reno, chances are you haven't heard about this and probably won't hear anything more about it after you get done reading this posting. I'm not sure which bothers me more--the fact that this happened, or the fact that it isn't really considered to be more than a regional news story because (luckily) no one was seriously hurt.
posted by Yukon Sully | 9:19 PM
2 Comments:
I'd like to hear some of the legal arguements likely to come out now that more of the story has been revealed. Rumors of bullying, a 14 year old waiving right to atty, "pre planning", moving to juvenile court. See today's RGJ:
http://news.rgj.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060318/NEWS10/603180333/1016/NEWS
There are certainly strong feelings in the community around the decision to charge the boy as a juvenile. In cases like this the District Attorney's office has discretion as to whether to bring charges in Juvenile Court or whether to charge the 14-year-old as an adult. Apparently the DA's office (who, in the interests of disclosure I must say I do not work for) does not feel that sufficient evidence exists to prove the specific intent to kill, a necessary element of attempted murder. Although I understand the frustration of parents and other observers, it's my experience that it's not a good idea to second-guess charging decisions when one does not have all available facts and evidence. Specific intent is a notoriously difficult element to prove beyond a reasonable doubt, and I've seen numerous cases in my career that might look like slam-dunks in the newspaper but a closer examination of the actual evidence reveals proof-problems that aren't readily apparent from a quick summary. As to the issue of statements made after the boy supposedly waived his right to an attorney, again I don't have all the facts but as a general rule a person can't waive a right he doesn't know he has or can't understand--the famous Miranda warnings that you hear being rattled off all the time on Law and Order aren't just magic words that a cop has to say before someone is arrested, they exist for the very important purpose of informing a criminal suspect in a custodial interrogation that he has the right not incriminate himself (i.e. he doesn't have to say anything to law enforcement if he doesn't want to) and that he may consult a professional (an attorney) who will better understand the real implications of his statements and actions. My gut says that the defense may have a decent argument that a 14-year-old may not have the capacity to understand the implications of waiving his Constitutional rights, but I don't work in Juvenile Court and haven't researched the issue (there may very well be statutes or caselaw directly on point), nor again do I have all the evidence in this case. Philisophically, I don't have a problem charging the boy as a juvenile. The law treats juveniles differently because they are, for lack of a better term, not entirely formed yet. They don't have the same mental capacity as adults, nor have they yet grown into the man or woman they will ultimately become. At that stage of life, rehabilitation is a much more realistic prospect.
Post a Comment
<< Home