Poll of the Day > 9 y/o Boy is charged with FIRST DEGREE MURDER for killing his ENTIRE FAMILY!!!

(+) Yeah! (+)

A 9 y/o boy from Illinois is charged with 5 counts of FIRST DEGREE MURDER in connection with a mobile home fire that killed his ENTIRE family, including 3 children and his ARMY VETERAN FATHER!!

The suspected was charged with 2 counts of arson and one count of aggravated arson and accused of intentionally setting fire to the home.

The inferno happened near the village of Goodfield that killed 1 y/o Ariel Wall, her 2y/o brother Daemeon, 2 y/o cousin Rose Alwood, 34 y/o US Veteran Father, Jason and the children's maternal grandmother, 69 y/o Kathryn Murray

All died from smoke inhalation inside the mobile home as 27 y/o Katrina Wall and her son from a previous relationship, Kyle Alwood, then aged 8 managed to escape

The suspect is not being named and said if the child is convicted, will be placed on probation for at least 5 years but not beyond the age of 21 and would likely receive counseling.

He will not be imprisoned if found guilty during a bench trial

Neighbor AnnaMarie Siebert said she heard screams could be heard coming from the burning property but the flames were too intense for bystanders to try and save them

DA Greg Minger said it was a "heavy decision" to charge a 9 y/o with the most serious offense but said it had to be done for "finality".

Jason was a US Veteran who served several tours of duty abroad including Iraq, Afghanistan and Korea and after worked as a truck driver who was an avid Hunter.

Do you think a 9 y/o is capable of committing first degree murder?

Fire -





Deceased Victims -












---

It looks like first degree murder to me, sure most kids aren't capable of such a crime but this kid did. What we need to know is the motive for the murders and arson.
---

mrduckbear posted...

Do you think a 9 y/o is capable of first degree murder?

Of course. It's not like it takes a lot of effort to light a match.
---

Sure. That one episode of Angel with the kid who was born with no soul (to the point it terrified the demon who possessed said kid) who attempted the same thing had to get the idea from somewhere in real life...
---

Whatever the kid had for intent the fact remains felony arson leads to felony murder even if he did it accidentally. Accident or not this kid is going to need a lot of help down the road.
---

Causing a deadly fire at 9 years old, killing his own family. For it to be murder, it has to be proven beyond the shadow of a doubt that killing his family was his deliberate intention. If rather than fire, he had knifed them all in their sleep, it'd be an open and shut case, obviously a hardened 9YO murderer, but I believe this is much more likely to be a horrible accident, made all the more horrible by people who want to make sure just one more life is destroyed by it.
---

Shadowbird_RH posted...

beyond the shadow of a doubt that killing his family was his deliberate intention.

This is just totally wrong. Take an instance where someone goes into a liqour store using a hand in a pocket to simulate a gun threatening to rob the store. The old man behind the counter dies of a heart attack and guess what the would be robber gets charged with. FELONY MURDER. The law is very clear on this but I guess you aren't aware of that.
---

That would be a stupid act in an already criminal action, a very different scenario than a 9 year old child playing with things his parents should have kept out of reach.
---

Some people seem to be missing the point here; the question is, is a nine year old capable, mentally and morally speaking, of being responsible for literal murder. Not can he physically perform an act that leads to deliberate loss of life (any human from a toddler upwards can accidentally kill someone), but can he understand what is going to be the actual result, and that the result is final and irreversible?

I don't have a lot of experience with kids (none of my own, I'm not from a large family, I'm not too sociable, etc), so I'm not speaking as an expert or anytying, but I would say that at nine years old, unless the boy in question has mental problems, then yes, if he commits murder then he would know what he was doing and should be treated as a murderer.
---

Shadowbird_RH posted...

That would be a stupid act in an already criminal action, a very different scenario than a 9 year old child playing with things his parents should have kept out of reach.

Under the law you're wrong, however sentencing guidelines allow for quite a lot of flexibility to prevent such additional tragedies.
---

Kerr Avon posted...

Some people seem to be missing the point here; the question is, is a nine year old capable, mentally and morally speaking, of being responsible for literal murder. Not can he physically perform an act that leads to deliberate loss of life (any human from a toddler upwards can accidentally kill someone), but can he understand what is going to be the actual result, and that the result is final and irreversible?

I don't have a lot of experience with kids (none of my own, I'm not from a large family, I'm not too sociable, etc), so I'm not speaking as an expert or anytying, but I would say that at nine years old, unless the boy in question has mental problems, then yes, if he commits murder then he would know what he was doing and should be treated as a murderer.

Unfortunately it just isn't cut and dried. Every child is different, this 9yo may fully understand yet some 17 yo may not have the capacity to. Each case has to be dealt with on it's own merit. There are psycho/sociopaths of all ages just as there are innocents of all ages.
---

peanutt121 posted...

Shadowbird_RH posted...

beyond the shadow of a doubt that killing his family was his deliberate intention.

This is just totally wrong. Take an instance where someone goes into a liqour store using a hand in a pocket to simulate a gun threatening to rob the store. The old man behind the counter dies of a heart attack and guess what the would be robber gets charged with. FELONY MURDER. The law is very clear on this but I guess you aren't aware of that.

But the robber was committing a crime while the kid may not have deliberately tried to kill his family. Big difference.

Yeah when I was 9 I knew the difference between wanting to kill somebody or not. Its simple in concept. I dont think this was that probably

Shadowbird_RH posted...

Causing a deadly fire at 9 years old, killing his own family. For it to be murder, it has to be proven beyond the shadow of a doubt that killing his family was his deliberate intention. If rather than fire, he had knifed them all in their sleep, it'd be an open and shut case, obviously a hardened 9YO murderer, but I believe this is much more likely to be a horrible accident, made all the more horrible by people who want to make sure just one more life is destroyed by it.

Reasonable doubt. Shadow of a doubt is not legally recognized because almost no convictions would occur if you had to disprove the Martians did the crime along with everyone else for every case.
---

They didnt give any details on how the fire was started so we cant really know if its deliberate or not.
If it was deliberate then yes its murder and you bet the boy is responsible.

I swear some people just dont remember what its like to be a kid, because I assume they are too old to remember what its like to experience childhood but anyone in or nearing the double digits should know very well that yes, murder is in fact evil. In fact I would argue that even younger ages know that murder is bad. In fact, as a kid in their eyes, since they dont know about rape, or extra heinous stuff like dismemberment, murder is the biggest the sin that kids know as the ultimate evil deed.

peanutt121 posted...

this 9yo may fully understand yet some 17 yo may not have the capacity to.

LMAO, XDD Someone one year away from being a legal adult, doesnt know murder is bad? My god....
Talk about babying adults.
---

deoxxys posted...

They didnt give any details on how the fire was started so we cant really know if its deliberate or not.
If it was deliberate then yes its murder and you bet the boy is responsible.

I swear some people just dont remember what its like to be a kid, because I assume they are too old to remember what its like to experience childhood but anyone in or nearing the double digits should know very well that yes, murder is in fact evil. In fact I would argue that even younger ages know that murder is bad. In fact, as a kid in their eyes, since they dont know about rape, or extra heinous stuff like dismemberment, murder is the biggest the sin that kids know as the ultimate evil deed.

peanutt121 posted...

this 9yo may fully understand yet some 17 yo may not have the capacity to.

LMAO, XDD Someone one year away from being a legal adult, doesnt know murder is bad? My god....
Talk about babying adults.

I take it you've never heard of diminished capacity or people with learning disabilities? smh. Once again you just can't fix the stupid on this site.
---

peanutt121 posted...

I take it you've never heard of diminished capacity or people with learning disabilities? smh. Once again you just can't fix the stupid on this site.

Having a disability isnt the norm though.
The way you worded it made it sound like there are normal seventeen year olds who dont understand the immorality of murder. If you mean something specific, say something more specific instead of saying something so broad and then call people stupid when they misinterpret you.
---

mrduckbear posted...

Do you think a 9 y/o is capable of committing first degree murder?

Probably.

mrduckbear posted...

The suspect is not being named and said if the child is convicted, will be placed on probation for at least 5 years but not beyond the age of 21 and would likely receive counseling.

He should be monitored up until 21. That's some serious shit.

Kerr Avon posted...

Some people seem to be missing the point here; the question is, is a nine year old capable, mentally and morally speaking, of being responsible for literal murder. Not can he physically perform an act that leads to deliberate loss of life (any human from a toddler upwards can accidentally kill someone), but can he understand what is going to be the actual result, and that the result is final and irreversible?

I don't have a lot of experience with kids (none of my own, I'm not from a large family, I'm not too sociable, etc), so I'm not speaking as an expert or anytying, but I would say that at nine years old, unless the boy in question has mental problems, then yes, if he commits murder then he would know what he was doing and should be treated as a murderer.

The problem with that approach is that young kids will have a greatly reduced understanding and, more importantly, have less-developed impulse control. Children frequently do things so horrid as to shock adults because they just haven't fully developed to the point where that behavior seems abhorrent. And kids are generally less able to stop and think before they do something.
---

deoxxys posted...

peanutt121 posted...

I take it you've never heard of diminished capacity or people with learning disabilities? smh. Once again you just can't fix the stupid on this site.

Having a disability isnt the norm though.
The way you worded it made it sound like there are normal seventeen year olds who dont understand the immorality of murder. If you mean something specific, say something more specific instead of saying something so broad and then call people stupid when they misinterpret you.

You just need to go re-read what I said, it was correct as stated.
---

No, not really.

Pointing out a fringe minority doesnt make you more correct.

Its like pointing out not all roofs protect you from rainwater, some are flawed and leak.
---

The prosecution would have one hell of an uphill battle to convince me that a particular child was capable of first degree murder, but if they really thought they had a compelling case, I would let them try.
---

I'm deleting my posts because I am concerned my public image is about to become tainted due to looking like a moron.
---

You're good, i was just confused. I deleted mine
---