GUILTY CA - Leila Fowler, 8, murdered, 12yo charged, Valley Springs, 27 Apr 2013 - #4

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
The court will also set a date for the boy to return for a jurisdictional hearing setting.

At the jurisdictional hearing, a judge will determine if the boy is guilty of the charges.
Click to expand...

So the "trial" will basically last one day?
 
Is it just me or does the juvenile justice system seem just so arbitrary? It just seems that minors don't get a lot of due process considerations. No jury. Short, usually secret trial, etc... Does anyone know if the burden of proof is the same for juvies, i.e. guilt beyond a reasonable doubt?

It just seems to me that it is just so easy for a minor, particularly one this young, to be railroaded. I'm not saying this boy is...but it sure seems a simple thing to do. It seems that sometimes the very things they do to protect the identity of the accused can actually work against them. I mean-look at all of the media on Jodi Arias and the constant pictures, etc... Yes, she was found guilty, but only after 5 years and a 4 month trial. Does anyone expect this boy's trial to go this long?

Highly unlikely.
 
TheDuchess said:
Is it just me or does the juvenile justice system seem just so arbitrary? It just seems that minors don't get a lot of due process considerations. No jury. Short, usually secret trial, etc... Does anyone know if the burden of proof is the same for juvies, i.e. guilt beyond a reasonable doubt?

It just seems to me that it is just so easy for a minor, particularly one this young, to be railroaded. I'm not saying this boy is...but it sure seems a simple thing to do. It seems that sometimes the very things they do to protect the identity of the accused can actually work against them. I mean-look at all of the media on Jodi Arias and the constant pictures, etc... Yes, she was found guilty, but only after 5 years and a 4 month trial. Does anyone expect this boy's trial to go this long?

Highly unlikely.
Click to expand...

My sister was tried in the juvenile system for a serious, violent crime. (Sigh.) The burden of proof was no different. Beyond a reasonable doubt still applied. I don't actually think it's common for a kid to be railroaded in the juvenile system. It's set up to protect them, be more lenient, and have more compassion. It's much more common, for a juvenile to get a very light, or rehabilitation based sentence. It's also much more common for judges to look at the kid more kindly, and consider their past. In my opinion, where kids get railroaded, is in the adult system. When they are kids, but tried as an adult.
 
blue22 said:
My sister was tried in the juvenile system for a serious, violent crime. (Sigh.) The burden of proof was no different. Beyond a reasonable doubt still applied. I don't actually think it's common for a kid to be railroaded in the juvenile system. It's set up to protect them, be more lenient, and have more compassion. It's much more common, for a juvenile to get a very light, or rehabilitation based sentence. It's also much more common for judges to look at the kid more kindly, and consider their past. In my opinion, where kids get railroaded, is in the adult system. When they are kids, but tried as an adult.
Click to expand...

I agree! Kids tried as juveniles typically can also get their records expunged when they become an adult. The punishment isn't as harsh and they receive more chances to improve their behavior. If they continue to reoffend then eventually they will end up in the adult system after other measures have failed. This is my experience in the juvenile justice system. Murder and other extremely violent offenses....well, that steps it up quit a bit when it becomes a matter of a public safety issue.
 
I've been thinking about IF lately. As I have mentioned, he is close to my son's age. I've been thinking about how much we have been analyzing his behavior at the crime scene and I am wondering if we are being fair in doing such. Adults have at times had very difficult times putting into words and keeping details straight after a traumatic experience. Sometimes, they even forget the traumatic experience altogether.

There has been lots of discussion as to who he called, what he said, how his story changed, etc...how fair is it to try to dissect each and every statement that was made at the scene, when things were frenzied and frightening, and then after the scene, when things had calmed down, but grief has taken over.

I'm not saying he didn't do it. I really don't know. I will wait to hear what physical evidence they have on him. But I really don't know how much we can rely on any of his witness statements or testimony during and just after the crime.

Just imagine for one moment that he is really and truly innocent. A strange man broke into the home and killed his sister. It happened very fast. He was very frightened. He didn't get a good look at the man or maybe no look at him at all. He is hiding in the bathroom scared to come out. He calls for help in a state of panic. Then he finds his little sister stabbed to death 21 times with blood everywhere.

What might happen to a 12 year old's mind at that particular moment in time? Can his statements be believed. Can he even trust his own memories? Often times, when there is a tragedy happening and details are unknown, the human mind can work overtime to fill in those details based upon what it may have known prior to the event or just from life experience. Perhaps the boy didn't see a long haired man, but for some reason, he has gotten it in his head that he had seen him and is simply manufacturing the man's description in his own mind.

I know I am getting deep here-but I am seriously wondering how we expect a 12 year old boy to behave and really hope this case isn't just hinging on his statements at the scene and a lack of any evidence from anyone else at the scene. I want the murder weapon, with his prints and Leila's DNA on it hidden in or near the home somewhere.
 
TheDuchess said:
I've been thinking about IF lately. As I have mentioned, he is close to my son's age. I've been thinking about how much we have been analyzing his behavior at the crime scene and I am wondering if we are being fair in doing such. Adults have at times had very difficult times putting into words and keeping details straight after a traumatic experience. Sometimes, they even forget the traumatic experience altogether.

There has been lots of discussion as to who he called, what he said, how his story changed, etc...how fair is it to try to dissect each and every statement that was made at the scene, when things were frenzied and frightening, and then after the scene, when things had calmed down, but grief has taken over.

I'm not saying he didn't do it. I really don't know. I will wait to hear what physical evidence they have on him. But I really don't know how much we can rely on any of his witness statements or testimony during and just after the crime.

Just imagine for one moment that he is really and truly innocent. A strange man broke into the home and killed his sister. It happened very fast. He was very frightened. He didn't get a good look at the man or maybe no look at him at all. He is hiding in the bathroom scared to come out. He calls for help in a state of panic. Then he finds his little sister stabbed to death 21 times with blood everywhere.

What might happen to a 12 year old's mind at that particular moment in time? Can his statements be believed. Can he even trust his own memories? Often times, when there is a tragedy happening and details are unknown, the human mind can work overtime to fill in those details based upon what it may have known prior to the event or just from life experience. Perhaps the boy didn't see a long haired man, but for some reason, he has gotten it in his head that he had seen him and is simply manufacturing the man's description in his own mind.

I know I am getting deep here-but I am seriously wondering how we expect a 12 year old boy to behave and really hope this case isn't just hinging on his statements at the scene and a lack of any evidence from anyone else at the scene. I want the murder weapon, with his prints and Leila's DNA on it hidden in or near the home somewhere.
Click to expand...

I really don't understand why IF would tell his sister (and her boyfriend) that Leila was "okay" when she was really dying of 21 stab wounds. We don't even know if IF told the dispatcher that Leila had been stabbed. It might not prove that he killed her, but it does show he didn't give a crap about getting his sister medical attention. 12 is old enough that if you find your sister dying of stab wounds...You call 911.

I hope they have the weapon too because if they don't, the defense will say the intruder took it with him. However, it wouldn't be hard for someone to get rid of the knife before LE came so we can't say that not having the knife means IF is innocent.

I also doubt that he had a phone in the bathroom. So even if he was in the bathroom when this intruder entered, he had to leave it, to find a phone to call someone. He also said that Leila was "okay" implying that he did check on her. I didn't get the feeling from the call that IF was hiding in the bathroom and scared to come out....
 
TheDuchess said:
I've been thinking about IF lately. As I have mentioned, he is close to my son's age. I've been thinking about how much we have been analyzing his behavior at the crime scene and I am wondering if we are being fair in doing such. Adults have at times had very difficult times putting into words and keeping details straight after a traumatic experience. Sometimes, they even forget the traumatic experience altogether.

There has been lots of discussion as to who he called, what he said, how his story changed, etc...how fair is it to try to dissect each and every statement that was made at the scene, when things were frenzied and frightening, and then after the scene, when things had calmed down, but grief has taken over.

I'm not saying he didn't do it. I really don't know. I will wait to hear what physical evidence they have on him. But I really don't know how much we can rely on any of his witness statements or testimony during and just after the crime.

Just imagine for one moment that he is really and truly innocent. A strange man broke into the home and killed his sister. It happened very fast. He was very frightened. He didn't get a good look at the man or maybe no look at him at all. He is hiding in the bathroom scared to come out. He calls for help in a state of panic. Then he finds his little sister stabbed to death 21 times with blood everywhere.

What might happen to a 12 year old's mind at that particular moment in time? Can his statements be believed. Can he even trust his own memories? Often times, when there is a tragedy happening and details are unknown, the human mind can work overtime to fill in those details based upon what it may have known prior to the event or just from life experience. Perhaps the boy didn't see a long haired man, but for some reason, he has gotten it in his head that he had seen him and is simply manufacturing the man's description in his own mind.

I know I am getting deep here-but I am seriously wondering how we expect a 12 year old boy to behave and really hope this case isn't just hinging on his statements at the scene and a lack of any evidence from anyone else at the scene. I want the murder weapon, with his prints and Leila's DNA on it hidden in or near the home somewhere.
Click to expand...

I see what you mean. For me, the only significance to the boy's statements being so different is simply that they do vary significantly--but that variance can point us in different directions, for sure. His statements could vary due to the trauma of witnessing an attack (and forgetful, disorganized thinking), or due to lying. In this case I tend to lean toward the latter, b/c it's a bit of a stretch to say one chased a suspect and then later change that aspect of the story. That's a pretty physically memorable thing, in other words.

But...even if he's lying, that still doesn't (to me) prove that he's the killer. Kids have been known to lie (and lie terribly) either to cover for loved ones, or out of fear of their perceived negative consequences for telling the truth. So, for me, there's still much to be proved, here. I, too, want to see the evidence 'beyond a reasonable doubt.'
 
TheDuchess said:
I've been thinking about IF lately. As I have mentioned, he is close to my son's age. I've been thinking about how much we have been analyzing his behavior at the crime scene and I am wondering if we are being fair in doing such. Adults have at times had very difficult times putting into words and keeping details straight after a traumatic experience. Sometimes, they even forget the traumatic experience altogether.
Click to expand...

I totally get what you are saying. However, when a 8 year old is found stabbed 21 times...in the interest of justice, public safety, and protecting him from himself...these questions must be asked. "Fair" goes out the window, when you are the only other person in the home and a murder happens. Fair and just are different. He deserves to be treated justly, not fairly. (In my opinion, of course.)
 
TheDuchess said:
I've been thinking about IF lately. As I have mentioned, he is close to my son's age. I've been thinking about how much we have been analyzing his behavior at the crime scene and I am wondering if we are being fair in doing such. Adults have at times had very difficult times putting into words and keeping details straight after a traumatic experience. Sometimes, they even forget the traumatic experience altogether.

There has been lots of discussion as to who he called, what he said, how his story changed, etc...how fair is it to try to dissect each and every statement that was made at the scene, when things were frenzied and frightening, and then after the scene, when things had calmed down, but grief has taken over.

I'm not saying he didn't do it. I really don't know. I will wait to hear what physical evidence they have on him. But I really don't know how much we can rely on any of his witness statements or testimony during and just after the crime.

Just imagine for one moment that he is really and truly innocent. A strange man broke into the home and killed his sister. It happened very fast. He was very frightened. He didn't get a good look at the man or maybe no look at him at all. He is hiding in the bathroom scared to come out. He calls for help in a state of panic. Then he finds his little sister stabbed to death 21 times with blood everywhere.

What might happen to a 12 year old's mind at that particular moment in time? Can his statements be believed. Can he even trust his own memories? Often times, when there is a tragedy happening and details are unknown, the human mind can work overtime to fill in those details based upon what it may have known prior to the event or just from life experience. Perhaps the boy didn't see a long haired man, but for some reason, he has gotten it in his head that he had seen him and is simply manufacturing the man's description in his own mind.

I know I am getting deep here-but I am seriously wondering how we expect a 12 year old boy to behave and really hope this case isn't just hinging on his statements at the scene and a lack of any evidence from anyone else at the scene. I want the murder weapon, with his prints and Leila's DNA on it hidden in or near the home somewhere.
Click to expand...

Hearing how the 15 year old in Utah who just killed his two adopted siblings was an honor student, in school sports and running marathons with the family, I can't say some kids are easy to read when they're able to kill. The father wants him to get help from mental problems, my question would be, then if you knew that, why was he left alone with kids?

Hearing the news lately you can't look at the age, the external involvement of the community or school, that's the scary part. Was there something going on in IF's head that noone knew how deeply he was troubled or capable of, if he's guilty? Were there so many kids it was overlooked or so much going on in family circumstances noone imagined this could be possible?

I hope they do have the evidence that he's guilty and not just he was the one in the home. I can look at my kids eyes and know when they're sick or when they were little if one wasn't being honest about taking that cookie. :) I can't imagine a parent not being able to read their child in something huge. Also how a child can be able to deal with everything that's going on with them, what they've seen or did and be able to still say they're innocent. I keep thinking about his demeanor in this last court hearing, he acted like this wasn't affecting him, strange.
 
eileenhawkeye said:
I really don't understand why IF would tell his sister (and her boyfriend) that Leila was "okay" when she was really dying of 21 stab wounds. We don't even know if IF told the dispatcher that Leila had been stabbed. It might not prove that he killed her, but it does show he didn't give a crap about getting his sister medical attention. 12 is old enough that if you find your sister dying of stab wounds...You call 911.

I hope they have the weapon too because if they don't, the defense will say the intruder took it with him. However, it wouldn't be hard for someone to get rid of the knife before LE came so we can't say that not having the knife means IF is innocent.

I also doubt that he had a phone in the bathroom. So even if he was in the bathroom when this intruder entered, he had to leave it, to find a phone to call someone. He also said that Leila was "okay" implying that he did check on her. I didn't get the feeling from the call that IF was hiding in the bathroom and scared to come out....
Click to expand...

The dispatcher who called IF did indeed know LF's injuries were serious.
After the parents' 911 call, the dispatcher called the 12 year old, and reportedly said that the girl had "severe injuries."

http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2013/...r-olds-murder/
 
TheDuchess said:
Is it just me or does the juvenile justice system seem just so arbitrary? It just seems that minors don't get a lot of due process considerations. No jury. Short, usually secret trial, etc... Does anyone know if the burden of proof is the same for juvies, i.e. guilt beyond a reasonable doubt?

It just seems to me that it is just so easy for a minor, particularly one this young, to be railroaded. I'm not saying this boy is...but it sure seems a simple thing to do. It seems that sometimes the very things they do to protect the identity of the accused can actually work against them. I mean-look at all of the media on Jodi Arias and the constant pictures, etc... Yes, she was found guilty, but only after 5 years and a 4 month trial. Does anyone expect this boy's trial to go this long?

Highly unlikely.
Click to expand...

IMO. The juvenile system does more harm than good, as demonstrated in this case, this child although guilty is being encouraged And supported to lie. Delaying treatment for a child that so desperately needs it if there is to be any hope of rehabilitation.

This case will drag on for two years... During which time he loses valuable time better spent. He needs treatment right now, not two years from now.

Parents know consequences should be immediate, not delayed indefinitely. So what is it these parents hope to accomplish? Are they merely satisfying their own denial?

All IMO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 108 more.
Total: 1,344 (members: 109, guests: 1,235)

Online statistics

Members online
109
Guests online
1,235
Total visitors
1,344
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
600,802
Messages
18,113,909
Members
230,990
Latest member
DeeKay
Back
Top