Interrogation video

[WITHTEETH]

I also read that the kid was being swtched every 3 hours to make it difficult to sleep. So sleep deprivation is another facto in this case.

[Sand]

In my view this suspect is a child and to treat him as a "terrorist" is child abuse. They simply need to rule whether or not, in a court of law, if he is to be tried as an adult then put him on trial.

[random n00b]

Nice logic. So, if treating a child as a terrorist is "child abuse", treating an adult as a terrorist is assault?

[Moatilliatta]

Child abouse != assault of a child.

 

I believe what Sand meant was that we have to try and figure out, if possible, whether the child is actually aware of what he did. It is commonly accepted in modern society that children aren't accepted as fully grown until a certain age, usually 18.

I have no idea how anyone could figure out whether he knew what he was doing and was capable of comprehending it, but that should be the first thing that any authority should try to do.

 

This is obviously slightly "pie in the sky" stuff, but shouldn't be dismissed out of hand either. I'm actually surprised at how much I agree with Sand here, children are different than adults and that should always be taken into account when handling them.

[Sand]

Exactly. When I was 15 I would have no idea how much damage a grenade would do or even considering the consequences of my actions a whole lot. Think about how you guys were like at 15 and putyourself in his shoes. How many of us truly knew the full extent of our actions and the the long term affect would be?

[taks]

Exactly. When I was 15 I would have no idea how much damage a grenade would do or even considering the consequences of my actions a whole lot. Think about how you guys were like at 15 and putyourself in his shoes. How many of us truly knew the full extent of our actions and the the long term affect would be?

uh, i did. not sure what kind of environment you grew up in, but i fully understood the consequences of what a grenade could do to people when i was 15. 15 is certainly within a crossover region between child and adult, and not all kids are mature enough at 15 to be held fully responsible for their actions, but only a few are so immature that they could reasonably claim they had "no idea how much damage a grenade would do" with a straight face. ahem.

 

taks

Edited July 16, 2008 by taks

[Xard]

I did

[random n00b]

Exactly. When I was 15 I would have no idea how much damage a grenade would do or even considering the consequences of my actions a whole lot. Think about how you guys were like at 15 and putyourself in his shoes. How many of us truly knew the full extent of our actions and the the long term affect would be?

Huh? Are you trying to say that you didn't know that tossing grenades at people could kill them? What did you think grenades are for, then? Juggling?

 

Feeble, even for you.

[Sand]

I am saying that kids wouldn't think about the grenade killing people. They would probably think that you pull the pin, throw, and run, and there will be a really loud boom. He;;, when I was fifteen I never even seen a grenade. Heard about them, but never had any experience with them either in real life or in gaming. We don't have much need for military hardware in the middle of Iowa.

[Moatilliatta]

15 is certainly within a crossover region between child and adult, and not all kids are mature enough at 15 to be held fully responsible for their actions, but only a few are so immature that they could reasonably claim they had "no idea how much damage a grenade would do" with a straight face. ahem.

Sure. It will still have to be taken into account and you're undervaluing how irresponsible children are. Haven't you ever had that feeling of walking amongts 7th-graders and telling yourself "I was never that immature"? That's because we tend to see our own past through rose coloure glasses.

 

All of this is moot though, since things such as this should be up to a psychologist or someone else with actual knowledge on the subject to decide whether his age is relevant or not.

[~Di]

I tend to think that a 15 year-old Canadian bright enough to travel halfway around the world and join a war in Afghanistan had a pretty good idea of what "kill" and "dead" means. I also tend to think that when he threw that grenade at a patrol of soldiers, he wanted to killl those soldiers dead.

 

Sand, you are describing the mental capacity of an average 8 year old, not an average 15 year old. This boy knew what he was doing. He wanted to kill soldiers, had the means to do so, and he did it. I'm not feeling particularly sorry for him at the moment. I feel a hell of a lot sorrier for the soldiers he killed and maimed.

[theslug]

Edited July 17, 2008 by Gorth
I am sure we can do without the uncalled for insults

[Dark_Raven]

Give the little ****er the chair. Old enough to kill, old enough to die for his sins. I don't know why Hades is sticking up for this piece of ****.

[Moatilliatta]

Tell me something people, if 15 year old children are fully aware of actions such as these, then why don't we allow them to vote? If this guy could fully comprehend his actions and if those actions wasn't caused or kindled by outside influences on a young mind then why aren't 15 year olds allowed to vote, drink or drive?

[theslug]

Actually you can legally drive at 15 and 1/2.

 

There really is no point in arguing with you people. I suppose 15 year olds around the world are just these little lap dogs that we carry around, completely and utterly helpless and retarded who need help feeding and changing themselves. Not until they reach 16 do they out grow this stage due to magic. Give me a break. You're a moron if you think a 15 year old doesn't understand what a grenade is and the purpose it holds.

 

Edit: The slug wins again.

Edited July 17, 2008 by theslug

[Sand]

Well to be fair Sand was a retard at the age of 15. He's come a long way since then. I mean he made assistant lead grocery bagger at the local super market. Lets give him a round of applause.

 

There is no reason for personal insults or attacks, Slug. If you can't win the argument with a civil tone then you have already lost. It does say a lot about your character, Mr. Slug, or lack thereof.

Edited July 17, 2008 by Sand

[Sand]

Give the little ****er the chair. Old enough to kill, old enough to die for his sins. I don't know why Hades is sticking up for this piece of ****.

 

It not that I so much sticking up for this kid, its the fact that they have a minor at Gitmo. If he is arrested and charged, then he should get his day in court and be found guilty or innocent. If found innocent, then he should be immediately released, if found guilty then immediately punished. He should not be tortured, abused, or whatever they do to "break" prisoners at that facility. No one should go through that. FInd him innocent, and set free, or guilty, and then punished. Long dragged out sessions of fruitless interrogations and troture serves no purpose.

 

And for the most part I was playing the devil's advocate. Di makes a good counter-argument, while Slug fails.

Edited July 17, 2008 by Sand

[tripleRRR]

Exactly. When I was 15 I would have no idea how much damage a grenade would do or even considering the consequences of my actions a whole lot. Think about how you guys were like at 15 and putyourself in his shoes. How many of us truly knew the full extent of our actions and the the long term affect would be?

 

At age 15 I damn well knew hand grenades killed people. And that throwing them at people would probably get somebody killed. I also knew that killing someone would get me into trouble. Now how much trouble and for how long I would have no idea. But the basics were there.

[Hell Kitty]

According to the news report I saw last night about this, they aren't even certain he threw the grenade, they only assume he did because he was the only one left alive.

 

Is Canada having an election soon, because that's what got the Australian citizen in Gitmo back here.

[Guest The Architect]

As someone ho has been in jail before this seems rather tame in comparison

 

What did you go to jail for, and for how long?

[Walsingham]

I have to back Sand up to a point. There's a massive difference between knowing and appreciating what a grenade will do. At fifteen I could tell you precisely what a grenade, knife, or axe would do to the human body. Many years later I've seen it, and it makes a big difference.

 

However, at fifteen you're still criminally liable in this country, even if you don't have full liability. The law accepts a gradation of awareness. Why can't we?

[Sand]

At this point they should try the kid for his crimes to determine guilt or innocent, then and assign punishment if he is found guilty. Dragging it along is not fair to the kid nor to the taxpayers.

[Moatilliatta]

I have to back Sand up to a point. There's a massive difference between knowing and appreciating what a grenade will do. At fifteen I could tell you precisely what a grenade, knife, or axe would do to the human body. Many years later I've seen it, and it makes a big difference.

Well said. I remember pulling the hat off a pakistani friend of mine and totally realising that pulling the hat off his head would result in the hat leaving his head. It wasn't till he pointed it out that I realised that it was a major annoyance as well. I was just being playfull. Granted I was also a bit younger than 15 (13 perhaps) but I still think that 15 falls below whatever arbitrary line determines adulthood.

The law accepts a gradation of awareness. Why can't we?

I can. But do you honestly believe Guantanmo can? As Hell Kitty mention they don't even know if he threw the grenade.

 

Anyone know what is the most likely judgement to fall on this kid if they believe they can "prove" that he did indeed throw the grenade and what will most likely happen to him?

[Sand]

Innocent til proven guilty in a court of law. That is the way it works here in the US and how it needs to work at Gitmo.

[random n00b]

I have to back Sand up to a point. There's a massive difference between knowing and appreciating what a grenade will do. At fifteen I could tell you precisely what a grenade, knife, or axe would do to the human body. Many years later I've seen it, and it makes a big difference.

Unfortunately, there's no way to be completely certain that an adult will be able to "appreciate" the effects of any form of deadly force - not everyone gets military training or otherwise first-hand experience with that sort of thing. The idea that such a thing is required for criminal liability to exist is a slippery slope I'm afraid and legal minimums must be placed somewhere.

 

I think that being aware in a purely intellectual sense that doing something can (and probably will) cause the death of others is enough to have people answer for their actions. The "gut feeling", emotional backlash and other consequences of killing or maiming another person can probably give a deeper insight, but they are accessories, not requirements for liability, the way I see it.