GA GA - Amy Yates, 8, Carrollton, 26 April 2004

[LovelyPigeon]

This boy hasn't been convicted of anything yet. We don't know anything about the evidence. We don't know what kind of trouble he's been in before.

Read up on the case of Michael Crowe if you aren't familiar with it before being so quick to judge this 12-year-old without even benefit of evidence.

 

[LovelyPigeon]

This boy hasn't been convicted of anything yet. We don't know anything about the evidence. We don't know what kind of trouble he's been in before.

Read up on the case of Michael Crowe if you aren't familiar with it before being so quick to judge this 12-year-old without even benefit of evidence.

 

[Fleur Delacour]

This boy hasn't been convicted of anything yet. We don't know anything about the evidence. We don't know what kind of trouble he's been in before.

Read up on the case of Michael Crowe if you aren't familiar with it before being so quick to judge this 12-year-old without even benefit of evidence.

What in the world would another case have to do with this one.

I wouldn't base any judgements I have of this case because of another persons case files.

I'm waiting to see the evidence on this one. I haven't convicted him yet. My thoughts on this thread are based on if the boy is guilty. I thought we all were basing an opinion on what to do with him if he was guilty.Perhaps I comprehended that wrong also. It seems pretty stupid for us to debate life in prision or rehabilation for an innocent person.

If he is found guilty by evidence then I believe society should be protected from predators even if they do start their careers at an early age.

 

[Ghostwheel]

What in the world would another case have to do with this one.

What Lovely Pigeon is referring to, in the Michael Crowe case, is that badgering a child under interrogation could possibly cause a false admission of guilt. If you refer to that case, and watched the interrogation videos, you might see how this current 12 year old boy, having been interrogated for four hours, might have confessed just because he didn't know what else to do. In that case, we are not just debating guilty=keep him off the streets for good or guilty=give him some counselling. We are also debating did he really do it, or was he coerced into saying he did. We sometimes get a couple of different debates going.

I wouldn't base any judgements I have of this case because of another persons case files.

That is a curious statement to me. Information from other files always makes me want to find out more information on whatever case I am looking at. If a certain case showed a REALLY good extenuating circumstance for killing someone, I might wonder if the current case I was looking at might have that same circumstance, so I'd research it a little more. Not the same as judgments, exactly, though. May be a semantics thing.

I'm waiting to see the evidence on this one. I haven't convicted him yet. My thoughts on this thread are based on if the boy is guilty. I thought we all were basing an opinion on what to do with him if he was guilty.Perhaps I comprehended that wrong also. It seems pretty stupid for us to debate life in prision or rehabilation for an innocent person.

I think the part where you said "Lets just for a moment say that this boy is shown to have been the murderer by evidence." got lost in the cross-fire.

If he is found guilty by evidence then I believe society should be protected from predators even if they do start their careers at an early age.

A valid opinion, if the debate takes the position this boy ends up actually guilty. Perhaps we could start here and move forward?

 

[Ghostwheel]

Lets just for a moment say that this boy is shown to have been the murderer by evidence.Not any statements, do you think him serving 2 years is Justice.. do you think this boy who is able to commit a brutal murder will become a model citizen and we will have nothing to fear from his release? I don't.

That depends on how the murder was committed. If he knowingly, and with malice aforethough (I love that phrase) stalked her, and killed her, with know remorse for his actions, no, I don't think he is probably salvageable.

However, if they had been talking and goofing around, and evidence shows that however she was strangled could easily have happened by accident (but they'd have to prove that one to me), and he showed great signs of remorse, and "OH-MI-GAWD how did this ever happen?", then you have a possible salvage.

Kind of the difference between pushing into a dry well with a ladder where they can get out; and pushing them into a full well when you know they can't swim.

So, in my opinion, it would depend on what the charge actually was.

 

[Ghostwheel]

Mary Bell turned out to be a "somewhat normal" human being, with "somewhat normal" human emotional responses, when she grew to adulthood.

I am curious, where did you get this information? Most of what I have read is like this statement "As an adult, being interviewed by Gitta Sereny, she overly performs her sorrow, even to the writer's suspicions: "Her recovery from these terrible bouts of grief, however, was astoundingly quick, and at first these rapid emotional shifts raised doubts in me."
That could easily be a sociopath who has learned to live within normal boundaries.

Puberty played no role in the crimes of Mary Bell... if we believe she was the sole murderess and aggressor. (I still have doubts that Mary's friend Norma was simply an "observer" and "follower", as she was portrayed during the trial.) Mary was only ten years old, and then turned eleven during the time period when the crimes occurred. Some girls can begin puberty at this age, but Mary clearly had not.

Do you base your belief she had not begun puberty on this picture alone, or is there some written documentation somewhere? You cannot just look at a picture and say "Uh-uh, she hadn't started into puberty yet." (I have friends who tell me they are living proof)

I also wonder about Norma, and what eventually happened with her.

 

[kk's mom]

You now I see how quick to judge you are a kid.I coached kids for years. And yes I had some hard core ones to boot. And the reason they were hard core was because of the way they were raised. Lets put the blame where it belongs on the parents.
I know with the attention the kids I coached got from myself and from other parents we saved at least 3 from a life of crime. Yes IMHO they can be rehabbed. Now I am not saying all. But at least you have to give them a chance.
HMMM Melendez come to mind here. they had eveything and look where that got them.

You CANNOT put all the blame on the parents. The parents of the juvenile who molested my daughter were model citizens in our area. Father a doctor and the mother a teacher. They have two other children who are honor roll students, athletically involved in their school's sports programs, boy scouts, girl scouts, you name it. These two kids never, ever got into trouble. Their delinquent brother on the other hand was always a problem and continues to be one. The parents still feel he can do no wrong, even with the current dilemas he continues to get himself involved in.

 

[mindys]

The parents still feel he can do no wrong, even with the current dilemas he continues to get himself involved in.

Your last sentence negated every thing else you said. YOU MUST now put some blame on the parents, look at the behavior you just described.

 

[mindys]

What in the world would another case have to do with this one.

I wouldn't base any judgements I have of this case because of another persons case files.

I'm waiting to see the evidence on this one. I haven't convicted him yet. My thoughts on this thread are based on if the boy is guilty. I thought we all were basing an opinion on what to do with him if he was guilty.Perhaps I comprehended that wrong also. It seems pretty stupid for us to debate life in prision or rehabilation for an innocent person.

If he is found guilty by evidence then I believe society should be protected from predators even if they do start their careers at an early age.

I think the behavior exhibited by other defendants this age is very relevant. And we should look at it as the court certainly will.

 

[kk's mom]

Your last sentence negated every thing else you said. YOU MUST now put some blame on the parents, look at the behavior you just described.

I'm done with this thread. Until you bleeding hearts have walked a mile in my shoes as the parent of a victim of abuse, you're way out of line for telling me how to feel or behave.

 

[LP Moderator]

I'm done with this thread. Until you bleeding hearts have walked a mile in my shoes as the parent of a victim of abuse, you're way out of line for telling me how to feel or behave.

KK's Mom, I agree with you that no one can understand how you feel unless they've gone through it as well. One of my sisters was murdered and as devastated as I was, I know it was nothing compared to what my parents were going through. As a mother to three of my own children, I know that I would need to be scraped off of the floor if anything like the case we're discussing here happened to my child. I'm wondering though if you have any ideas on how the system can be improved to better meet the needs of children who've been abused and for the children, who, for whatever reason, become violent at such young ages.

 

[mindys]

I'm done with this thread. Until you bleeding hearts have walked a mile in my shoes as the parent of a victim of abuse, you're way out of line for telling me how to feel or behave.

Oh geez, sorry, didn't mean to infuriate you like this.

 

[LovelyPigeon]

It becomes obvious, quickly, why American justice calls for impartial jurors and an impartial judge to decide matters based on evidence alone.

Those of us with a loved one who has suffered abuse or worse at the hands of another are probably not capable of impartial judgement in our own case or one similar to our own. It would require inhuman ability to disassociate from our very strong feelings.

In this case of Michelle Yates death, police may have the right person under arrest and evidence to prove if--but there 's a chance they may not. Children & juveniles, the emotionally impaired, and the mentally impaired are the least likely to resist police attempts to gain "confessions".

The state of Georgia takes the position that juveniles & children are judged as juveniles & children rather than as adults. The punishment meted out to those found guilty of crimes is also meant to be suitable to children rather than to adults.

Those of us who have suffered a personal crime or (vicariously) one to our children would do well to join a group with a counselor to have a safe place to express and work out feelings.

 

[Doyle]

I have created a new thread in Crimes Forum
Discussion on Children that commit Heinous crimes.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7205

please continue this discussion over there.. as This is a tragic situation for all involved.

 

[johnny]

Lawyer slams police, says boy, 12,

The lawyer defending the Carrollton boy accused of strangling 8-year-old Amy Yates said Thursday that his client emphatically denies having anything to do with her death.
"He steadfastly maintains he did not see this girl that day," Carrollton lawyer Gerry Word said of the 12-year-old boy.
Word also said investigators from the Carroll County Sheriff's Department interrogated the boy for four hours without his parents in the room, intimidating the boy and obtaining statements from him under duress.
The lawyer said he has been told by police that the boy made statements during questioning, but investigators did not specify to him what the boy said. Word said the boy repeatedly told investigators he was innocent.
"You give me four hours in a room with a 12-year-old, and I can get him to say whatever I want," said Word.
He said the questioning appears to be legal, but he felt it was wrong. Word said the boy's parents knew he was being interviewed by police. "They refused to let his parents come back there and be with him. If a parent had been with him, that interogation wouldn't have gone on for four hours. It would have stopped."
Amy disappeared Monday from the Twin Oaks Mobile Home Park in Carrollton. Her body was found later that night near an empty lake bed. Police say the girl was strangled by the boy, who lives in the same trailer park. Authorities have revealed few details.
On Thursday, the dead girl's father, Tom Yates, contradicted the lawyer's statement that the boy did not see Amy the day she died. During the search for the girl, the 12-year-old approached Yates and said he had seen the girl earlier in the day jumping on a trampoline in the trailer park, Yates said.
At that time, Yates said, he and the boy were standing only 30 feet from where Amy's body eventually would be found. "I think he was trying to lure us away from her body," Yates said.
Yates said police told him the boy had acknowledged to authorities that he and Amy had been together at some point during the day.
Word responded Thursday that while the boy knew the girl and may have seen her in passing at some point Monday, the boy said they had not been together for any length of time that day.
"He denies having any physical contact or playing with her," Word said.
Also Thursday, Yates said he planned to campaign to ask legislators to rewrite state law so a child 12 or younger who is convicted of murder can be sentenced to more than two years in detention. Yates said the law should allow sentences of up to life in prison. Yates proposed the new sentencing law be called "Amy's Law" after his daughter.
"Amy is the face of this issue in Georgia. We don't want this to happen again," Yates said. "I will be there every step of the way."

Victim will be buried today

Amy's death continued to dominate conversation in Carrollton on Thursday. Many people criticized the state law limiting sentences for children younger than 13 who are convicted of murder.
"The whole community around here is upset," said Sherry Goodwin, a 40-year-old Carrollton mother of three teenage boys. "That little girl's life is worth more than two years."
The young suspect remained in a juvenile detention facility Thursday.
"He's emotionally upset. He's being separated from his parents," Word said. "He's distraught. He's accused of doing something he knows he didn't do and that he has no knowledge of."
Word said investigators focused only on his client, and "the real killer may still be out there."
Carroll County Chief Deputy Brad Robinson responded that investigators remain confident they have apprehended the right person. "There will be a day in court for this young man and the court will hear the evidence," Robinson said.
Pete Skandalakis, Carroll County district attorney, said he suspected early on that the murder was done by a young person because the girl's body was not badly bruised. An attack by an adult likely would have caused more injuries, he said.
Authorities would not discuss the questioning of the boy, save to say it was legal. "The only thing I can say is things were done by the law and aboveboard and that this case will be tried in court," Robinson said.
The suspect's father signed a waiver of the boy's rights to a lawyer and against self-incrimination, Word said, but the father signed it after the four-hour interview.
Dan Summer, a Gainesville defense attorney and former prosecutor, said "an after-the-fact" rights waiver "kind of stinks." He said investigators "have a higher responsibility [to explain suspects' rights to parents] when dealing with children."
The Yates family spent Thursday greeting friends and relatives at visitation services for their daughter and preparing for Amy's funeral today. The girl will be buried in a blue dress and her casket will be filled with stuffed animals.
Amy also will wear a gold locket containing a family portrait, which her mother and father had planned to give her next week, for her birthday.

 

[johnny]

The boys lawyer made the statement that "give me four hours with a twelve year old child and I can get them to say anything". How many hours has he had with his client? Sound like he's pretty good at coaching his clients.


LP ........the "attorney" always wants to have the first opportunity.

 

[LP Moderator]

The boys lawyer made the statement that "give me four hours with a twelve year old child and I can get them to say anything". How many hours has he had with his client? Sound like he's pretty good at coaching his clients.

I think what he meant was that an adult with skills can get a child to believe and to confess to something he/she is innocent of doing. Similar to the case referenced above involving Michael (I'm sorry I can't remember his last name). The bottom line is that children should NOT be interrogated without either a parent or their attorney present. Children are not allowed to enter into legal contracts, etc. They should NOT be allowed to waive their rights to have an attorney present before they make any statements to the police.

 

[Babcat]

This case is destined to make so many people so emotional.

There will be people that plant their feet firmly from the very first press story and refuse to move an inch when it comes to wanting LONG term justice for this little girl. They will believe this 12-year-old boy "did it" because the cops say he did it and the press printed it. And that is all they need... evidence and ethical police work be damned!

There will be people who feel, across the board with no regard to circumstances, that children of only 12 years have very limited capacity. These people will feel that this suspect is a child and that justice would not be served by condemning him to a life of lock-up, if it is proven he "did it" beyond a reasonable doubt.

And then there will be those in between that swing back and forth... first wondering if the police even have the right suspect... then wanting to know what circumstances led to this brutal attack, if they are shown the right suspect is indeed this 12-year-old... then wrestling with their inner feelings to balance the grief of a family now minus a beautiful little girl, and a family with a 12-year-old child who must be frantic realizing he may be locked up away from them quite some time.

Different life experiences of individuals are going to form the basis for their opinions. If they themselves (or a family member) were once victimized by an "evil" brutal person who happened to be legally a child, they are going to want to lock this child up for good. On the other hand, if they have a child around the same age who has been accused unjustly of a crime in the past they are going to immediately doubt the accuracy of police. And if they have a child who has done some pretty bad things in the past but now seems to have matured and reformed, they are going to be sure that such concepts as rehabilitation are possible.

For me... I'll weigh my opinions one step at a time. My first concern is whether or not the police may have jumped to conclusions, developed tunnel vision, and simply have this crime all wrong. The boy's current attorney says the boy NEVER said he killed that girl, no matter how many different ways the police asked the question. If that isn't true he's going to look like an idiot and will most likely be dismissed as counsel for this child. But I have some serious doubts about how this whole "catch the bad guy" thing went down.

WHY wouldn't police KNOW that interrogating any 12-year-old is a risky situation, and why did they not videotape every minute of the interrogation? This would be a valuable tool for their own protection as well as the child's. You would think that the Crowe case would have taught LE all over the nation that different tactics are needed to when questioning children. Any 12-year-old can be tricked into a confession. It is like shooting fish in a barrel. One of the news stories said (and I'm looking to find it again because it seems so unbelievable) that AFTER the boy had been questioned for four hours his father signed a paper giving permission for him to be interrogated without parental presence, and also waiving an attorney's presence. That is a big problem. It means that the child was questioned fully four hours before anyone thought to get the appropriate paperwork (sloppy and possibly unethical police work)... and it also shows that the father is about as sharp as a marble. Why not just go get the horse, noose, and make a clearing under a strong tree with a perfectly positioned limb to accomadate a short target while he's at it? :banghead: If I found out the police had been interrogating my twelve-year-old for four hours without bothering to check with me I would have taken a piece of police hiney with me while I marched my son out that door.

And the DA's logic is not exactly invoking confidence in me either right now.

Pete Skandalakis, Carroll County district attorney, said he suspected early on that the murder was done by a young person because the girl's body was not badly bruised. An attack by an adult likely would have caused more injuries, he said.

What vast amount of criminal profiling led him to this half assed conclusion? A child will put up a heck of a fight against another child, especially a kid they are familiar with. A child will have some confidence that they could actually free themselves from this person, and the child would fight "tooth and nail" and most likely make a lot of noise. Unless there is some evidence that this boy had a gun to her head, or a knife to her throat, and threatened to shoot (or stab) if she made any noise or fought him, this theory is ridiculous. And if that was the case... why would a child of twelve endeavor to manually strangle a girl only four years younger when the task takes a great deal of strength and time. Why not simply shoot her or slit her throat if he had the means?

OTOH an adult stranger, or even someone known to her, would be much more intimidating. Such a suspect could much more easily convince an eight-year-old not to fight or scream because the consequences would be an unknown to the little girl. Children of eight will mouth-off to, and fight other kids that they perceive to be "kids", even if they don't know them, up until about age 17 or 18 when the child now perceives an adult. An unarmed, familiar, twelve-year-old neighbor would have seemed only a marginal threat to this child at first, even if he was known as a bully and a possible threat.

Unless some serious evidence is revealed, or a eye witness is produced... I am not convinced, even a little bit, that this kid killed this little girl.

 

[BirdieBoo]

I just did some work on a training course relating to interrogation. The minor has the right to have an attorney, but apparently police do NOT have to allow the parents in the room during the interrogation. This is in CA.

 

[Doyle]

The boy accused of strangling an 8-year-old Carrollton girl enjoys many of the same activities as any 12-year-old: video games, playing football and basketball with friends, riding his bike.

But Joe Morrow and Deion Boykin said they stopped playing with the boy after they saw a darker side.

"Sometimes he was fun to hang out with," Joe said, "but sometimes he had this little attitude. If you say something to him, he'll flip you a bird or walk off."

Playful wrestling sometimes ended with the boy hurling threats or picking up a stick to fight, said Joe, 15. The two said they cut ties with the boy about three months ago, after they suspected he stole a radio out of a car in a junkyard and got into other trouble.
http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/0504/02boy.html