This is how it is in my country. The parents are the prosecuted ones while the kidds are getting mental health care. Is parents job to keep bad influences away of their kids. Is parents job to know where are their kids and what are they doing at any giving time.
Like I said before this is 2015 you cannot always shield your kid from negativity you just gotta implant the right morals in their heads and hope for the best that they won't do anything like those girls, because sometimes you gotta be exposed to the positive and the negative in order to function and survive in this world. So saying the parents should be on trial for this is stupid, cause you really don't know what goes on in children heads and they can be very unpredictable
Why not just recognize every case is unique instead of blanket statements that don't allow for the others point of view??? Ta-da!
Further to that, Wisconsin law is such that anyone past 10 years old is tried as an adult for "severe crimes" I think this fits the bill.
What's the age of criminal responsibility? Also if they have been deemed for to stand trial, that means they UNDERSTAND what they did and know what it meant for them to do that. Trial as adults
What makes you think they never paid attention to their kids, their 12 years old their brains are far from fully developed, but I'm gonna say anymore just read over what I said again
A responsable parent wouldn't let their child to access such websites. Moreover... A responsable parent wouldn't let his 12 years daughter old to go in the woods togheter with only two other girls at same age.
@ Steve, please give me a cite for the Wisc. law re 10 yr old offenders. News to me and I think unconstitutional even under current SC precedent. Thx
Any parent who can raise children in such a way to have them turn out like that should be imprisoned. It is their responsibility to raise their child with decent morals and compassion. That story really shocked me. Any 12 year old kids I know would be incapable of such a horrific act. They have either been traumatized throught childhood or have serious underlying mental health issues. They should be imprisoned for life in my opinion. People this cold can never be 'rehabilitated'.
Is adult court right place for 12-year-old suspects in 'Slender Man' stabbing? A Wisconsin prosecutor says evidence of premeditation warrants charging two girls, 12, as adults in a horrific stabbing case. Others say the girls' fantastical motive, involving a fictional Slender Man, indicates otherwise. Here's the trend in prosecuting juveniles as adults. By Mark Guarino, Staff writer JUNE 4, 2014 Raw: French Police Search for Jewel Thieves AP Two 12-year-old Wisconsin girls are facing homicide charges after allegedly committing a near-fatal stabbing against a classmate. Police say they committed the crime to 'please' a fictional character they read about online, and thought was real. Prosecutors say Saturday's multiple stabbing of a young girl outside Milwaukee was so calculated that attempted homicide charges are warranted against the two 12-year-old suspects – a charge that guarantees the girls will be tried as adults. Already, however, that decision is under fire by those who say it is “unprecedented” to try such young defendants as adults, especially given their fantastical motive as relayed by police. The alleged attackers told police they intended to kill their friend when they stabbed her 19 times on Saturday, leaving her in the woods for dead. Discovered by a bicyclist, the victim is now in fair condition. According to the criminal complaint, both girls said they were driven to kill by the mythological character Slender Man, a staple of user-generated online fiction. Their plan was to join Slender Man in his home, which they insisted was located in a state park in northern Wisconsin. Some juvenile justice experts say such a motive points to a confused mental state or stunted emotional development – reasons often cited for not trying minors as adults. But the intentional homicide charges mean that, under Wisconsin law, the case will automatically go to adult court because both girls are over the age of 10. Recommended: Do you have a clue about teenage behavior? Take our quiz! In the past decade, the US Supreme Court has put limits on sentences for juveniles. In 2005, it forbade the death penalty for youths who committed their crimes before they were 18, and in 2010 it banned sentences of life without parole for those under 18 convicted of crimes short of murder. In 2012, the high court went further, saying states cannot mandate a life sentence without the possibility of parole for juvenile murderers, but must take into account their age. Whether the girls are tried as juveniles or adults has great bearing on their futures. If convicted in juvenile court, they could be released at age 25. If tried and convicted in adult court, each would face as many as 65 years in prison. Arguing in favor of keeping most cases of juveniles in juvenile court, law professor Richard Kling at Chicago Kent College of Law says that practice is in keeping with all other facets of society regulating individual behavior. “We realize kids under 16 are not allowed to smoke, legally they are not allowed to have consensual sex, they can’t join the Army, they can’t vote – all because, as a society, we have concluded their brains are not sophisticated to handle those functions,” says Mr. Kling. “But when kids do bad things, we decide all the sudden we are going to treat kids as adults.” The premeditated nature of the crime, as reported by police, is what led Waukesha County District Attorney Brad Schimel to charge both girls as adults in Waukesha County Circuit Court. Mr. Schimel says the facts of the case show that the homicide was calculated. “It’s troubling when a person lashes out in anger. It’s more troubling when they lash out in cold blood. Isn't that the worst kind of killer, the cold-blooded killer?” he told reporters Monday. Kling disagrees, saying premeditation is not a condition exclusive to adult behavior. “Kids can premeditate. Kids can consciously think about how to sneak downstairs to sneak candy. That doesn’t mean they are not children,” he says. The American criminal justice system traditionally has treated juvenile offenders differently than adults, on grounds that they may not fully grasp the ramifications of their actions or have control over their impulses, and puts more faith in the possibility of rehabilitation. Data up to 2007, the last year for which figures are available, show a general drop in the numbers of juvenile suspects tried as adults. Some 8,500 juvenile cases (or 1 percent of the total) were petitioned to adult court in 2007, down from 13,100 in 1994, according to the National Center for Juvenile Justice. Some of those cases may represent lost opportunities to turn around young lives, suggests Nadine Connell, assistant professor of criminology at University of Texas at Dallas. “Data suggest that youths who are charged and tried in adult court do not receive the same level of mental health and educational services as youths charged in juvenile court, which can have serious ramifications for their future behavior, both in and out of the correctional system,” she says. States vary regarding the eligible age of transfer to adult court. Wisconsin is one of 10 states to set the age at 16 for most offenses, according to data from the National Conference of State Legislators. Thirty-eight set the age at 17. Two states, North Carolina and New York, set the age at 15. But Wisconsin has a direct waiver law, which states that adult courts automatically have jurisdiction over any homicide case involving juvenile offenders over the age of 10, says Professor Connell. “There is no discretionary decisionmaking on the part of the judge or the prosecutor,” she says. Anthony Cotton, an attorney for one of the young suspects, told the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel he is requesting a mental evaluation of his client in the event her competency is an issue. He also said he plans to ask the court to move the case to juvenile court. “I believe she has those needs,” Mr. Cotton said of his client. If convicted, even in adult court, the girls would serve their sentences in juvenile facilities until they turn 18, at which time they would be transferred to an adult prison. Each is currently being held on $500,000 bond at a juvenile facility in West Bend, Wis. Their next court appearance is set for June 11.
Go look it up yourself if you don't believe what you read on the internet. Its not hard to do. You're already online as it is
And yes the parents are to blame. But psychotic is as psychotic does. Parents can no more read minds than anyone else. Also the former post was from Christian monitoring. First site I came across on the subject with relevant facts on legal standpoint.
Fortunately, the stabbed girl survived. If I were the judge, I would just apply what the law says. They are usually tried as kids unless certain exceptions apply. Meanwhile, I will call Slender Man to the witness stand to hear his version of events...
Please us the term pyschotic correctly. A pyschopath is not a murderer in the majority of cases. A pyschopath is generally a lot more cold and cunning than a regular person. I myself am medically classed as a clinical pyschopath and I would not commit a crime such as this. I do however see that you are saying that these two girls are either traumarized or mentally ill. Judging from what I have read on this case these girls were not pyschos.
"Psychopath" redirects here. For other uses, see Psychopath (disambiguation). Not to be confused with Psychosis, Psychopathology, or Psychic. Psychopathy (/saɪˈkɒpəθi/; also known as – though sometimes distinguished from – sociopathy /ˈsoʊsiəˌpæθi/) is traditionally defined as a personality disorder characterized by enduring antisocial behavior, diminished empathy and remorse, and disinhibited or bold behavior. It may also be defined as a continuous aspect of personality, representing scores on different personality dimensions found throughout the population in varying combinations. The definition of psychopathy has varied significantly throughout the history of the concept; different definitions continue to be used that are only partly overlapping and sometimes appear contradictory.[1] Hervey M. Cleckley, a US-American psychiatrist, probably influenced the initial diagnostic criteria for antisocial personality reaction/disturbance in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), as did American psychologist George E. Partridge.[citation needed] The DSM and International Classification of Diseases (ICD) subsequently introduced the diagnoses of antisocial personality disorder (ASPD) and dissocial personality disorder, stating that these have been referred to (or include what is referred to) as psychopathy or sociopathy.[1][2][3][4] Canadian psychologist Robert D. Hare later repopularised the construct of psychopathy in criminology with his Psychopathy Checklist.[1][5] Although no psychiatric or psychological organization has sanctioned a diagnosis titled "psychopathy", assessments of psychopathic characteristics are widely used in criminal justice settings in some nations, and may have important consequences for individuals.[5] The term is also used by the general public, in popular press, and in fictional portrayals.[6]