Photo du Jour 591
The LGBT Center Is Bleeding Cash, Needs a Mortgage Bailout
Google Maps Adds Biking Directions
Ask SFist: Where Can I Buy Girl Scout Cookies?
SFPD Drug Technician Accused of Stealing Cocaine Forces Lab's Closure
Happy day after, All Hallow's Eve. Although the Castro was tame, others parts of the Bay Area, it seems, were not.
Last night at Washington Park in Alameda, a 15-year-old girl was shot and killed in a robbery. According to the the Chron, "the girl was with about 10 friends when five or six teenage boys whom they didn't recognize approached them." One of the guys in the approaching gaggle shot five shots into the air, and then one in her back. She was pronounced dead at Highland Hospital in Oakland. No arrests have been made in connection with her murder. (Don't they draw the bridges, or something like that, when a serious crime happens on the island?)
Speaking of teenagers, a 17-year-old boy was charged as an adult for murder. A student from Irvington High School some damn school, he shot and killed a neighbor across the street from his high school, a 24-year-old man. Now, we know juveniles often are charged as adults, but...why? Is it the more grizzly the crime, the better chance that that some teen will get charged as an adult? Lawyer types, fill us in.
And now for some sad news. Someone at last night's Halloween in the Castro was arrested for jaywalking. Also, three other were pinched for visible tipsiness. See, it's people like this that ruin it for the rest of us.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
Arrested for j-walking? If it was a regular day around this city (which never seems to be), cops don't give a damn. And when they really do enforce it, they give you an infraction ticket.
If you're charged as an adult you get more jail time.
I guess what I mean is: why have these laws at all? Or something like that.(Sorry, late night last night.)
So the City basically told all the East Bay-ers to stay on their side of the Bay for Halloween and for the most part, it worked. As a result, no one got shot or stabbed or raped or gay-bashed in the Castro and elsewhere in the City and the crime stayed over in the East Bay a result.
Hmmm....I'm still trying to see how that is a bad thing.
well, i'm not a lawyer, but i think the application of these laws is at least partially due to the grizzly nature of it like you suggested. it's not like he was shoplifting or doing graffiti or other typical 'kid' crimes, so the prosecution is trying to circumvent the limits on how severe of sentences can be given to minors. (it is my understanding that juvenile offenders can only be held until they are 18, no matter what the crime..?)
so the argument in favor of this of course is that the fact is, if a 17-year-old isn't smart enough to know that murdering folks is bad, then they should probably be off the streets for a lot longer than a yaer. if you're capable of taking someone's life then you also are capable of taking responsibility for it - it's not like he didn't know there would be repercussions.
these charge-as-adult cases get questionable when you're dealing with like that case in georgia supreme court from last week where a 17-year old was charged with child molestion laws for performing oral sex on his 15-year old girlfriend and got 10 years in prison.
but i think any sane person can easily see the difference in the severity of these situations. (and the fact that he was exonerated by a close vote of the supreme court lends one to question the sanity of the georgia legislature, who actually repealed the law in question but made a specific exception for that particular case.. )
#4 - I don't see why it's a bad thing either, but the nature of San Francisco's public discourse is such that if the murder rate were to triple, there will still be people screaming "Police state! Police state!" the minute one extra cop gets put on the streets.
uh. easy. if you are underage, accused of a crime, and NOT white, you're probably going to be tried as an adult.
One powerful argument for charging juveniles as adults is so that they aren't as likely to be persuaded by their gangster buddies to commit crimes on the basis of receiving lesser jail time than the older gang members would. If that actually works, I'm in favor of it.
I jaywalked twice today, in front of a policeman. Take that, SFPD!
I'm not a lawyer either, but I believe juveniles can be held up to age 25 in the youth authority...
I do think that the option to charge juveniles as adults has gone a bit bananas, and I voted no on the state proposition from a number of years ago that made it easier to do so. Granted, there are cases that an adult sentence is appropiate, and the Alameda case is probably one of them from what I've been hearing about it, but there are times when it just simply isn't the right thing to do. There is no one-size-fits-all. In any event, a life sentence without parole for any minor, regardless whether or not they were charged as an adult, is cruel and unusual in my opinion.
*ahem* while this does not constitute legal advice...it is my understanding that a minor 14 or older who has personally killed someone in a special circumstances murder can be charged in adult court. (That's one of the specified crimes that get you the death penalty, like lying in wait to kill someone.) But the minor is not death penalty eligible. Small comfort I know. Check out Welfare & Institiutions Code ยง602(b)(1) if you are nerdy and want to read the details.
There are other ways to charge a minor in adult court, and I would have to hear more of the facts but it sounds like maybe this was a special circumstances case, hence the adult filing.
As to the grizzly part, I don't know much about bears. (Sorry...I just couldn't resist.)
oops...I wish I could edit. I should have said, to be more accurate, that according to the statute, I think a minor 14 or older who commits a special circumstances murder actually MUST be charged in adult court. Mandatory direct transfer. So if that is what happened here, juvenile court is not even really an option.
OH MY GOD! that 17 year old kid is not a student of IRVINGTON HIGH SCHOOL! this makes me mad. DANG people, get ur stories straight! please.