GUILTY CA - Lawrence 'Larry' King, 15, fatally shot at Oxnard school, 12 Feb 2008

[gxm]

IMO, this is a very polarizing case. I'm wondering if they'll ever get a jury to agree on it. If I were on the jury (which I wouldn't be because I'm biased against trying juveniles as adults) I'd be pushing for the lesser charge and not budging an inch. And clearly there are others on the opposite end of the charge spectrum who would do the same.

 

[PrairieWind]

It will be interesting to see if any of the jurors will talk to the media and tell us what the deliberations were about. There is a lot about this case that could be polarizing or cause strong emotions.

 

[LCoastMom]

Update: The jury in the Brandon McInerney murder trial submitted questions to the judge this afternoon.

What is a person of average disposition? And what is rationally — regarding a person acting rationally.

The defense team is researching some definitions that the prosecution proposed regarding a person of average disposition. The term rationally has not yet been defined.

Once the answers are determined, they will be sent back to the jury.


http://www.vcstar.com/news/2011/sep/01/mcinerney-jury-unable-to-reach-verdict-in-3-a/

This just in at 2:28 PM - sounds like they're still trying.

 

[gxm]

Update: The jury in the Brandon McInerney murder trial submitted questions to the judge this afternoon.

What is a person of average disposition? And what is rationally — regarding a person acting rationally.

The defense team is researching some definitions that the prosecution proposed regarding a person of average disposition. The term rationally has not yet been defined.

Once the answers are determined, they will be sent back to the jury.


http://www.vcstar.com/news/2011/sep/01/mcinerney-jury-unable-to-reach-verdict-in-3-a/

This just in at 2:28 PM - sounds like they're still trying.

That's strange. Is it a hung jury or not? Interesting questions. I wonder if they're trying to figure out how to determine a "rational" teenager? (Which is a bit of an oxymoron.)

 

[LCoastMom]

That's strange. Is it a hung jury or not? Interesting questions. I wonder if they're trying to figure out how to determine a "rational" teenager? (Which is a bit of an oxymoron.)

The judge sent them back to further deliberate (until 2PM) - said he would declare a mistrial if they were still hung at 2:00.

It appears to me (since they are asking questions), they are really trying to do the right thing.

You nailed it, I raised a houseful of teenagers, never met a rational 14 year old in my life - heck rational at 21 is pushing it.

ETA: Is anyone who commits cold blooded murder behaving rationally? NO - Would the average person have committed the same act? Also NO! Does acting rationally or irrationally absolve someone of murder? IMO - NO!

 

[joe jones]

Update: The jury in the Brandon McInerney murder trial submitted questions to the judge this afternoon.

What is a person of average disposition? And what is rationally — regarding a person acting rationally.

The defense team is researching some definitions that the prosecution proposed regarding a person of average disposition. The term rationally has not yet been defined.

Once the answers are determined, they will be sent back to the jury.


http://www.vcstar.com/news/2011/sep/01/mcinerney-jury-unable-to-reach-verdict-in-3-a/

This just in at 2:28 PM - sounds like they're still trying.

hopefully some of the jurors are moving from there position and they may finally come up with a verdict,

but the one question being posed is just bizarre, surely they should have discussed all this by now, and what does rationality have to do with it, murder is not rational,

I get the need to look at what would a reasonable person do as this is an important consideration for the jury, would a person other than the defendant have murdered Larry under the same set of circumstances and the answer to that question was answered over and over again during the trial by the plethora of witnesses who said Larry made comments to other boys, everybody in school saw what he was wearing, but they did not feel the need to execute him

I have to say the defence did good, the state did not discredit the defences witnesses so for weeks we had bad Larry who provoked the defendant into killing him,

 

[PrairieWind]

The discussion of "rational" to me (and I'm just guessing) indicates they are discussing 2nd degree murder. That would mean they have ruled out 1st degree. Again, this is just a guess.

 

[joe jones]

they were at 9 to 3 for one of the charges, whether for guiilty or not we don't know,

there appears to be wriggle room if only 3 jurors have differing opinion to the majority, maybe if they slept on it and came back for one last deliberation day and then agreed or disagreed then they could hang,

the trial took 8 weeks of there lives one more day maybe not too much of a hardship

 

[gxm]

The latest news says they are hung with seven going for manslaughter and five going for 1st or 2nd degree. Judge has declared a mistrial.

http://www.vcstar.com/news/2011/sep/01/mcinerney-jury-unable-to-reach-verdict-in-3-a/

Of course, given the erratic reporting on this case, that could change in the next few minutes.

 

[joe jones]

if it sticks at mistrial then I am glad that there were at least 5 jurors who would not budge from 1st or 2nd degree murder, and the defence argument did not sway them as they accepted that the defendant deliberately chose to kill Larry and carried out the killing

the state should retry him on the same charges,

 

[gxm]

As I said earlier, I think the case is so polarizing that we may not see a jury come to an agreement. I know I wouldn't budge from manslaughter, and I know there are others who wouldn't budge from 1st or 2nd degree and it seems to be a fairly even split (in the jury room).

IMO, the state really blew it. Brandon should have been charged and convicted as a juvenile and this case would have been resolved years ago. If they retry with the same charges, there's a good chance, IMO, that it will be another hung jury. What a mess the DA has made!

 

[LCoastMom]

The lone juror who spoke to the media — but didn't give his name — said the fact that McInerney was 14 at the time of the shooting was a big point of contention as the jurors deliberated his fate over the last five days.

McInerney, who had been stoic through most of the trial, smiled faintly at his mom, who covered her mouth as she sobbed after the judge declared a mistrial. He blew a kiss to the girl who was his girlfriend at the time of the shooting.

The King family quickly left the courtroom without comment.

None of the jurors believed the shooting was a hate crime, said McInerney's lawyer, Scott Wippert, who along with the prosecution met with the jurors in private.


http://www.vcstar.com/news/2011/sep/01/mcinerney-jury-unable-to-reach-verdict-in-3-a/

Interesting.

I am in Vta Co., was in Oxnard this afternoon. Literally everyone I talked to thought McInerney was guilty of murder. None thought he should be let off lightly because of his age or his own abuse. Most said he deserved Life w/o Parole.

These were mostly random people I spoke with while running errands, the one person who said she thought Larry was sexually harassing Brendon still believed he should be convicted of murder...

I hope the state retries him.

 

[gxm]

LCoastMom, I'm on the right coast and I haven't heard anyone discuss this case. Judging by this thread, I assumed my opinion was in the minority. It heartened me to read that, as it should be, Brandon's age was an important point of contention.

 

[LCoastMom]

gxm I hear you, I understand, I do. He should not be tried as an adult, but he committed an "adult" crime, the very reason states changed the rules on who should be held accountable and punished more severely than a juvenile.

As a juvenile offender Brendon will be released in 8 years (max) after spending the remainder of his formative years segregated by his "affiliations", race and crime. He will have a subpar education and will have spent most of his time in lock up due to insufficient staffing. He will not receive appropriate counseling. His record will be sealed!

Do you want this person living next door to you? I don't. I don't want him in my neighborhood, or living near my kids and their families.

Tried and convicted as an adult he will have many years to work on being the best he can be, he can work on his education, learn a skill and maybe even realize the horror in what he did to another human being. I just don't believe this can happen in 8 years.

Until we change the whole system, all we can do is protect others from being victimized by "Brendons" for as long as the law allows.

ETA I was surprised at how many people were waiting on this verdict here, I hadn't heard a peep out of anyone regarding the trial outside of my own family and inner circle.

 

[Nova]

LCoastMom, I'm on the right coast and I haven't heard anyone discuss this case. Judging by this thread, I assumed my opinion was in the minority. It heartened me to read that, as it should be, Brandon's age was an important point of contention.

You don't seem to take the oath of a juror very seriously.

I agree that McInernay should have been remanded to juvenile court.

But once he was charged as an adult, then a potential juror's options are to (a) obey his/her oath and weigh the evidence as if the defendant were an adult; or (b) announce his/her intention to ignore the law and get him/herself bounced from the case.

You keep posting as if you get to rewrite the law because you are a juror. You do not. A juror is the trier of fact, not the arbiter of the law.

(And for the record, yes, I have declared my refusal to follow the law and I have been excused from certain types of cases. (Capital murder cases, drug possession offenses.))

 

[gxm]

You don't seem to take the oath of a juror very seriously.

I agree that McInernay should have been remanded to juvenile court.

But once he was charged as an adult, then a potential juror's options are to (a) obey his/her oath and weigh the evidence as if the defendant were an adult; or (b) announce his/her intention to ignore the law and get him/herself bounced from the case.

You keep posting as if you get to rewrite the law because you are a juror. You do not. A juror is the trier of fact, not the arbiter of the law.

(And for the record, yes, I have declared my refusal to follow the law and I have been excused from certain types of cases. (Capital murder cases, drug possession offenses.))

IMO, the DA overcharged because she wanted to make a name for herself and an example of Brandon. She blew it. Brandon should have been tried and convicted as a juvenile years ago. But she wanted to make a political statement, and overplayed her hand. If I'm reading correctly, not one juror believed it was a hate crime.

I have repeatedly stated that I would never have been seated on this jury because I have a bias against charging juveniles as an adult. If Larry had shot Brandon, my position would not change. That said, seven members of the jury (a significant number) believed that the mitigating circumstances were compelling enough to vote manslaughter. (Considering the initial 9/3 split, I'm guessing three went for murder one, and the other two moved from manslaughter to murder two.)

IMO, the prosecution should take a sober look at what sort of plea they will offer because I doubt they'll be able to find 12 people to come to one conclusion. If Brandon had been a few years older, his age probably wouldn't have been such a large factor, but he was barely 14-years old and IMO way too young to charge as an adult.

 

[Nova]

IMO, the DA overcharged because she wanted to make a name for herself and an example of Brandon. She blew it. Brandon should have been tried and convicted as a juvenile years ago. But she wanted to make a political statement, and overplayed her hand. If I'm reading correctly, not one juror believed it was a hate crime.

I have repeatedly stated that I would never have been seated on this jury because I have a bias against charging juveniles as an adult. If Larry had shot Brandon, my position would not change. That said, seven members of the jury (a significant number) believed that the mitigating circumstances were compelling enough to vote manslaughter. (Considering the initial 9/3 split, I'm guessing three went for murder one, and the other two moved from manslaughter to murder two.)

IMO, the prosecution should take a sober look at what sort of plea they will offer because I doubt they'll be able to find 12 people to come to one conclusion. If Brandon had been a few years older, his age probably wouldn't have been such a large factor, but he was barely 14-years old and IMO way too young to charge as an adult.

I"m sorry, gxm. If I saw the posts where you said you would recuse yourself from this case, I had forgotten them when I posted.

I think the prosecutor is in something of a bind here. Once the decision to try as an adult is made, the facts dictate the charge and the facts pretty clearly indicate first-degree (premeditated) murder.

I don't know for sure, but I'm not sure prosecutorial ethics allow a DA to say, "I don't think we can get a conviction on 1st degree; let's charge 2nd degree because we're more likely to get that." Not unless there is a legitimate issue as to the facts. (Of course, this is in theory. In practice, who knows?)

Arguing that a 14-year-old lacks the mental facility for true "premeditation" might carry some weight with me personally, but it would also call into question the entire system of charging young teens as an adult.

It will be interesting to see what the DA does next. Since none of the jurors seemed to be in favor of acquittal, it seems very unlikely that the prosecutor will decline to retry.

 

[PrairieWind]

The prosecutor has the discretion to charge whatever he/she thinks the case warrants. There is no duty, legal or ethical, to retry on the same charges. In fact, a prosecutor has a higher ethical duty than defense attorneys to do what is right. Clearly this jury did not believe 1st degree was appropriate., and none thought there was a hate crime. Ethically or logically, I dont see how the district attorney could attempt to retry on those charges. But i do agree the DA is really in a pickle here. There will be political pressure to retry on the 1st degree and the hate crime. I wouldnt want to be in her shoes.

 

[Nova]

The prosecutor has the discretion to charge whatever he/she thinks the case warrants. There is no duty, legal or ethical, to retry on the same charges. In fact, a prosecutor has a higher ethical duty than defense attorneys to do what is right. Clearly this jury did not believe 1st degree was appropriate., and none thought there was a hate crime. Ethically or logically, I dont see how the district attorney could attempt to retry on those charges. But i do agree the DA is really in a pickle here. There will be political pressure to retry on the 1st degree and the hate crime. I wouldnt want to be in her shoes.

Your post makes prosecutors sound like petty dictators with unlimited discretion and no guidelines.

While some DAs may behave in such a fashion, in fact, a DA is supposed to charge based on his or her appraisal of the facts. Going for a lesser charge to guarantee a conviction is a violation of prosecutorial ethics.

 

[PrairieWind]

Your post makes prosecutors sound like petty dictators with unlimited discretion and no guidelines.

While some DAs may behave in such a fashion, in fact, a DA is supposed to charge based on his or her appraisal of the facts. Going for a lesser charge to guarantee a conviction is a violation of prosecutorial ethics.

Prosecutors have enormous discretion. But they are also bound by bar association ethics. Guidelines are provided by the statutes, the case law, and his/her judgment/experience. The OVERWHELMING case law would suggest against charging a 14 year old as an adult. Based on your last sentence, I guess every plea bargain accepted by a prosecutor is an ethical violation?