Former juvenile lifers talk about the meaning of second chances | Hacker News Reader

Former juvenile lifers talk about the meaning of second chances

brproud.com

42 pointsgmays34 comments

This content is not available in your country/region.

so archive.org: https://web.archive.org/web/20220724192109/https://www.brpro...

Thanks a lot.

Article carefully avoids mentioning why these individuals had received lifetime sentences. I assume their murder victims didn't get "second chances".

What's with the voting options for this post? There are no up/downvote arrows, but I didn't vote for it. If I had, there'd be an "unvote/undown" option, but it's not there, either. Never seen that on HN before.

Downvotes are only available for comments, not posts. Posts can only be upvoted or flagged.

for what it's worth, I have the option to upvote as usual

Yeah, I remembered that detail as soon as I commented.

It's odd, this thread is still doing it and it's the only one.

I see the normal up arrow fwiw.

I've had the arrows disappear on the site before; it was fixed by a force-reload. Also, I think you lose the ability to remove a vote after some number of hours.

The country that has places no value on life is the one that lets murderers out to walk free among civilization.

There should be a reasonable age for criminal responsibility. Compare the different approaches of the British [1] who tried 10 year olds as adults and the Norwegians [2] who took a different approach. Which is more civilised? Which is more likely rehabilitate the offender?

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_James_Bulger [2] https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/2010/mar/20/norway-t...

You couldn't have picked a worse case for trying juveniles as adults. I think any country that wouldn't try these animals as adults couldn't be called civilized. Torturing and mutilating a 2 year old at the age of 10 is not recoverable human behavior.

And of course...

> Venables was sent to prison in 2010 for breaching the terms of his licence, was released on parole again in 2013, and in November 2017 was again sent to prison for possessing child sexual abuse images on his computer.

I beg to differ. As revolting as their actions were, it is hard to consider 10 year olds as adults and treat them as such in the eyes of the law. The recidivism you raise could actually support my argument rather than strengthen yours. Had they been treated differently (I.e. more as children) perhaps they might have been rehabilitated and ended up more “normal”.

Don’t misunderstand my position. What they did was vile beyond comprehension, but were 10 year olds fully responsible for their own behaviour at this age?

It's not really relevant whether they're fully responsible. Is a dog responsible when it bites a person? No, but it's unfit for civilization, and must be put down.

Starship Troopers?

while I agree that all dogs should be put down, the issue is much more complex than this. What even is civilization? there are plenty of civilizations where killing the weak is praised and encouraged.

For doing what they did to a fucking 2 year old? Yes. A crime against an adult might be more excusable, but this is evil beyond redemption.

> You couldn't have picked a worse case for trying juveniles as adults. I think any country that wouldn't try these animals as adults couldn't be called civilized. Torturing and mutilating a 2 year old at the age of 10 is not recoverable human behavior.

That does not mean you have to try them as adults. You have to try them as 10 years old who have done that. Factually, they are not adults.

Why is it not recoverable? I'm no psychologist but I'd expect almost any behaviour you express at 10 years old is correctable.

Wow, advocating for a lighter hand in the murder of James Bulger is certainly new. Personally, I would have preferred life without parole in that case.

why must be people be "rehabilitated"? killing, including killing for play, is perfectly normal among all carnivorous mammals, and we are carnivorous mammals, like it or not. it's not murderers or rapists who are in the wrong, but "civilization" which forces people to behave unnaturally

I disagree with this. Animals will only act how they act until it becomes inconvenient (I.e death ). It’s not that their way of acting is right but just so that their environment allows for it without outright threat of extinction. If the environment became one in which being carnivorous was disadvantageous (let’s say some freak virus that only transfers through the consumption of meat) then even though they’re following their natural instincts , the world is no longer a place for them.

Similarly, civilization is as natural as a meat-only transferring virus. It’s a environmental change. In this environment. Murders and rapists are usually disadvantaged. Its never a matter of who has a right or non-right to exist by what’s “natural” but what is advantageous given your environment.

The median time served for murder in the US is 13.4 years.

But, not all things are equal. For some reason, both the lengths of these sentences, and the frequency of receiving life without parole (or life without parole as a child offender) vary widely... Across racial lines.

Weird, huh?

Let's look at the data. Between 2012-2016, black male offenders in the federal court system received sentences 19.1% longer on average than similarily-situated white male offenders:

https://www.ussc.gov/research/research-reports/demographic-d...

However, this analysis doesn't control for income level or socioeconomic status. There are major differences in economic propsperity between black and white populations, and as a consequence major diffences in the quality of their legal counsel. This is hinted at in the 2012 Booker Report:

https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/news/congressio...

>During these periods, Black male offenders were more than 20 percent less likely to receive a non-government sponsored below range sentence than White male offenders were. These differences may contribute to the difference in sentence length between Black and White male offenders.

The quality of your counsel has a big impact on whether you can get "non-government sponsored below range sentence", as this law firm suggests:

https://alanellis.com/sentencing-tips/

>The foregoing trend makes reinforces the importance of using a sentencing specialist able to help humanize your client, preferably someone familiar with the federal system’s many nuances.

Much like the gender pay gap, the closer you look at the racial sentencing gap the smaller it gets, and the more it looks related to wealth rather than race. The racial wealth gap is its own separate issue, but it seems to me like solving that problem could do much to fix the disparity in sentencing.

Do they keep judge sentencing statistics?

I'd like to read the source for that statistic.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com