Dismissal Sought In Murder Case Of Pa. Boy, 11

Murder is murder no matter what age you are. He knew what he was doing. If he killed the whole family would it have changed anyones attitude ?

Really? Would it have been murder if the 4 year old girl shot the gun? IF the boy did this, it could have been a accident, he could have been troubled, rightfully, and acted on impulse. He is a child very violated by the PA system because he is not an adult and should have not been exploited as he was. The fact is, if this boy was an adult this case would have been dismissed for lack of evidence. PA, justice has to be justice for a child made adult. You cannot hold a child on suspicion. Anyone could have gone in the house and committed this crime. Our differences in thought reminds me of an old song...
It's a song by George and Ira Gershwin, from 1937. "Let's Call the Whole Thing Off."

(verse)
Things have come to a pretty pass,
Our romance is growing flat,
For you like this and the other
While I go for this and that.
Goodness knows what the end will be;
Oh, I don't know where I'm at...
It looks as if we two will never be one,
Something must be done.

(refrain)
You say eether and I say eyether,
You say neether and I say nyther;
Eether, eyether, neether, nyther,
Let's call the whole thing off!
You like potato and I like potahto,
You like tomato and I like tomahto;
Potato, potahto, tomato, tomahto!
Let's call the whole thing off!
But oh! If we call the whole thing off,
Then we must part.
And oh! If we ever part,
Then that might break my heart!
So, if you like pajamas and I like pajahmas,
I'll wear pajamas and give up pajahmas.
For we know we need each other,
So we better call the calling off off.
Let's call the whole

THING OFF!!!

One more time!

Lets call the whole thing off!!!

If it was an accident he should have said so. But he didn't

If he would have been an adult nothing would have changed because if you commit murder everyone is considered an adult.

Not anyone could have gone in the house. The wood cutters said they only saw two sets of footprints leaving that morning. No tire tire tracks

Who saw the woodcutter? What time was he there? Why was he looking for footprints? Does he have a witness? Does his witness have a witness? Or was it only the 4-year old girl? If it was an accident, the kid could have been afraid to say it even happened and judging by the way the victim's family is, that makes sense. This would not be an uncommon reaction and the law is so horrendous that I am certain the lawyers had to advise complete silence. An uncommon reaction on the other hand is a 7 year old hearing a "boom" and not running to see what happened. Anyone could have been stalking the home and went in after the kids went to school and shot the gun and cleared the signs of entry. Only the PA LAW is calling "everyone" an adult but the law is a civil violation to this boy because he clearly is not an adult. So the LAW needs looked into and very much so. So you are saying we can charge a child because of footprints in the snow, according to the woodcutter........hmmm...

Let's discount the woodcutter all together, and go by what YOU think. Can you tell me why we should give more validity to YOUr description of the events?

One may excuse the 7 y/o's reaction to the "boom" by relating the fact there's enough area around there to allow people to target practice. Example: I live on the lower east side. It's common to hear people going by, far into the evening, with their music vibrating my home. Would I be able to tell you what time a particular car went by? NO! Understand now??

You people are giving "children" too much leeway. You're forgetting that you're vulnerable to "children" too. Let it happen to you, or yours, and see what your reaction would be!!

I will quit wasting time. Your mind is closed because you are to close to the family.

Jr, we are not related to, nor do we know the family personally. We are normal people that feel a child is being violated by the PA system as it stands. This law is a violation to ANY child and a child in this circumstance should always be protected by the juvenile system because of their age, their vulnerability, and mostly because it is humane.
P.I. This is our point. Your validity, is YOUR theory, our validity is ours. How can you convict a child on theory? I understand what you mean by the vibrating music,and the target shooting. I hear target shooting often, I hear planes overhead my home, and I hear nearby trains that vibrate my house. I would know if a gun went off in the house, if a plane landed on my roof, and if a train fell on my home....Any I would run to see what happened.

ah. just let the kid out of jail. he'll fit right back into the general populous with all the goofs, panty puller, diaper snippers, pedo van drivers and murders in New Castle.

Perry Mason and Gershwin wrote:

Jr, we are not related to, nor do we know the family personally. We are normal people that feel a child is being violated by the PA system as it stands. This law is a violation to ANY child and a child in this circumstance should always be protected by the juvenile system because of their age, their vulnerability, and mostly because it is humane.
P.I. This is our point. Your validity, is YOUR theory, our validity is ours. How can you convict a child on theory? I understand what you mean by the vibrating music,and the target shooting. I hear target shooting often, I hear planes overhead my home, and I hear nearby trains that vibrate my house. I would know if a gun went off in the house, if a plane landed on my roof, and if a train fell on my home....Any I would run to see what happened.

I'm dealing on realism, Perry...NOT theroy. I'm going by evidence. What are the odd's of sweet lil innocent Jordan going into Kenzie's room with a LOADED gun, to tell her he was upset because she bought the girls their favorite cereal, but NEGLECTED to buy his? Could he have meant to tell her they were out of toilet tissue? Could he have been there to tell on one of his mean, soon-to-be, stepsisters, or to ask where his father was, so he could get some much needed attention, before he went to school, blah, blah? Unless he MEANT to do her harm, he WOULDN'T HAVE TAKEN THAT GUN DOWN FROM THE WALL!! HE WOULDN'T HAVE LEFT HIS ROOM WITH IT!! HE WOULDN'T HAVE AIMED IT AT THE BACK OF HER HEAD. Give me, and all of the rest of the world who is vulnerable to people, child/teen/adult, who has a problem they can't overcome.

I don't s'pose you were ever angry at someone, when you were Jordan's age? How many people have you killed? DON'T waste the gun thing on me, either. I grew up around guns, my children were raised around guns, and now, my grandkids. If someone wants you dead, they'll find a way...even the poor lil bullied, misunderstood things, like Jordan.

Correction: Give me, and all of the rest of the world who is vulnerable to people, child/teen/adult, who has a problem they can't overcome, A BREAK!!

You keep singin the same old song. Realism involves the truth and accuracy. The truth is an 11 year old is not an adult. The truth is there are no witnesses to the crime. The law requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt, therefore squashing your realism to utter "theory". You cannot convict on theory.

Hey Frank, That's why they have trials. This will probably be moved to Juvenile Court and all this rhetoric will be for nothing.

I don't think that witnesses are required for a conviction. The DA has more than theory. If he didn't, the defense attorney wouldn't be working so hard to throw out EVIDENCE.

From where I stand, I've heard about a gun in the home of hunters, a bullet in the yard, a blanket, clothes with gun powder. And lately, a father of one of the girl's that learned he has been paying child support for years and is not the father. Better get a witness.

Jr, Everybody who is anybody would hope to high heaven that their lawyer is doing everything to protect them. They are doing their job, not sweeping things under the rug, like you imply. Maybe the DA should do things legally or not so "improperly". Ever think of that?

Now the truth is, people along that route 422 corridor develop slower than most, so in reality 11 years old is more like 5 years old. take it for what it's worth, it is what it is.

Truth is people in Western PA would hang a 5 year old just to keep them huntin laws....gotto get em whitetail deer,....truth is your not far off the corridor....

And Ohio is any better. You hicks in ohio hunt even on Sunday. Can't let bamby have a day off.

I say shave the kid's head and see if there is a "666" on top of it.
Regardless, there was probably powder residue on the kid's finger plus his prints on the stock and barrel or the Troopers wouldn't have gone as far as they did...but yes, he's an 11 year old, albeit a dangerous 11 year old and should be tried in Juvenile Court....what we have here ladies and gentlemen of the jury is a mongoloid judge who can't tie his own shoe laces and an idiot defense attorney who doesn't know procedure.

Who wants to practice law in Lawrence County?
Bueller?
Anybody?

It may have been the kid's gun. Naturally his prints will be on everything. That does not mean someone else could not have used the gun with gloves. You do not have to be a dangerous kid to shoot a gun. At eleven, all you need is a gun to be dangerous. The 666 belongs to the government who year after year declines to acknowledge the gun laws need changed. The 666 also goes to the PA law-makers. Jolly good show, men, really... great thinking here. "IT'S ENOUGH TO MAKE ME THROW-UP!" Big Brother will never take me down!!!