Christopher Lane
It is difficult not to react purely emotionally to the news that three teenaged boys in Duncan, Oklahoma gunned down a 23-year-old jogger last week – shot him in the back – because they were bored and had nothing else to do. The victim, an Australian named Christopher Lane, was attending East Central University on a baseball scholarship. Police caught the three alleged assailants a few hours later: James Edwards, Jr., Chauncey Luna, Michael Jones, ages 15, 16 and 17, respectively. They told Police Chief Danny Ford they were bored and decided to kill someone. Mr. Lane just happened across their path.
My first instinct is that there is no punishment severe enough for this wanton disregard of life. These three should be tried as adults and, if found guilty, sentenced to death. Upon reflection, I will probably modify my position, but not by much.
As of this writing, I know nothing about these three boys or their backgrounds – whether they come from standard, two-parent families or broken homes with parents in jail. Photos suggest that two are black and one is white. All of the other particulars will emerge as the investigation and prosecution progress. There may be dramatically extenuating or mitigating circumstances that could at least partially explain this utter perversion of human behavior. But regardless of what the circumstances turn out to be, several factors will remain.
First, if these boys have reached their mid-teen years without any appreciation of the sanctity of human life or caring that it is wrong to kill people without reason, then there is little hope they will somehow acquire this appreciation anywhere down the line. John Douglas and I frequently cite the eminent forensic psychologist Stanton Samenow, who notes that by definition, you cannot rehabilitate someone who was never habilitated in the first place. Prison, at best, will be a warehouse for them.
Second, even if one of these young men is found to have had a terrible and abusive background, it is doubtful that all three did. Therefore, where was the modulating influence in this group? Where was the one guy to say, “Hey, you know what? This is not a good idea.” Such an individual was not part of this threesome. As far as we can tell, they were all of the same mind and that mind was sociopathic. They took the life of someone they did not know and destroyed all the lives around that individual for an afternoon’s entertainment.
Undoubtedly, all kinds of excuses will be offered: the ease of obtaining guns, the influence of movies, television and video games, the lack of proper summer activities for teenagers, mental and emotional problems. But it all comes down to this: Unless we see compelling evidence to the contrary, these three teens may be presumed to have known the difference between right and wrong, were not having hallucinations or delusions, and were mentally able to conform their behavior to the rules of society. By that definition, we may comfortably conclude they were all sane. And knowing what they allegedly did, we may comfortably conclude they were all evil.
Note that neither “sane” nor “evil” are medical or psychiatric terms. But “sane” is a legal term that defines culpability. And “evil” is a philosophical term that most police officers will tell you defines motive.
So, dependent on what we learn about these three alleged shooters, I will probably back down from my emotional reaction that if found guilty, despite their ages, they should be executed. But I will be surprised if I change my mind that, based on the motive for their act and all it implies about their respective and collective psyches, they should never walk the streets as free men.
They are unredeemable.
I’ve been a silent reader and fan for a while now. All killings outside of self-defense or defense of others are outrageous. I think all personal crimes–robbery, rape, murder–are acts of hatred. Only when the judiciary willfully ignores the careless expressions of specific types of hatred just ahead of time are the criminals trained to just not move their lips during the act itself. In this case, the shooter has seemingly left internet evidence of his racism. And yet the DA says, with a straight face, that there is “no” evidence this was a hate crime. So the lesson is clear: if you’re white, you can never be a victim of a hate crime. Sorta’ like how it used to be if you weren’t a nun, you couldn’t be raped. Just don’t say anything while pulling the trigger and you’ll get a pass if you are any color but white. But if you are white, you are automatically a racist. Worse if you have said anything, ever, in your entire lifetime. Just for the record, I’m part Mexican, Indian, English, and more. I tire of the double-standard, regardless of the perp’s color. Critical Thinking is sorely lacking from an entire generation and they are polluting the internet, one of the most amazing and scariest purveyors of the 1st Amendment ever bequeathed from the predecessor inventor to its progeny… and it’s our fault. We blew it and I have no idea how we can fix it now.
not only could have Lane been “anyone of us” (jogging) but just as well those three boys could have been “anyone of us” (given their livelyhood) if we where to have lived their lives. true they can not be rehabilitated, ok… then we need to habilitate them. If they knew how wrong (as we know it) it was to do what they did, it wouldnt
have manifested in their minds to begin with. But justice must be served and part of that justice should be to “habilitate” them, then they will see and feel the pain
that the families of the victim see and feel, its a psychological mind altering proccess but ive seen it work on incarcerated persons, it causes a change of heart and its powerfull stuff, and its the most Just thing to do to persons in the shape of these guys. Just keep them under suiside watch untill they make it through.
Yes, no doubt the attorneys will explain in the void where these boys’ souls should be with a carefully considered work of fiction, supported by friends and relatives. Even moreso than with child abuse, those who stand by and don’t do anything to stop it are just as guilty. At least one will say they had no idea the leader was serious. Even if that were true, it doesn’t explain why he’d choose to hang around someone that evil, so I think you’re right. Irreedemable. I’ve got no problem putting teens in prison for violence. I knew a couple as a child I thought should be there, one that was 12 and a girl in middle school.