Syracuse 15-year-old gets two to six years for 7-cent robbery

The old man gets the last laugh.

He's been robbing those kids by getting a Social Security check....that those kids will never get.



But yeah, they should get jail time...they snuck up behind an old man and beat him down. That's not cool.

reply to post by Pervius


Yeah SS is really comparable to violently beating and robbing someone

You ever think that he paid into SS, especially if he is that old

Originally posted by dolphinfan
reply to post by JibbyJedi

 

The title is the title from the story.

An elderly gent gets attacked from behind, knocked to the ground and kicked.

Its dark out

He sees two robbers, both with guns who ask him for money and he hands him the 7 cents he has.

The kids have no prior records, there is no forensic evidence, they can't find the guns, the gent is 73.

There is absolutely nothing to tie these two to the crime other than the statement.

The kid "confesses" while in the box and later recants.

The prison officials recommended that this kid be treated as a minor.

That they convict these two on only his identification is one thing. To give the kid potentially 7 years with nothing other than the victim's word, when that victim is 73 years old and making the identification in the dark after being beaten up is absurd.

edit on 30-8-2011 by dolphinfan because: (no reason given)

I find it odd that few point out the injustice of trying a teenager as an adult. I guess because the teenager is a boy many of the older man and women here have no problem with that(after all older men from the traitor generations view younger males as competition, preventing them from acting on their pedophile instinct's to go after 16 and 18 year old gal's).

Heck it is getting pretty sickening that little boy's to 15 year old teenage boy's are held to higher standards then grown women. I guess the lady folk will find out the hard way when the traditionalist's have given American Women enough rope to fall for their noose(traditionalist's want to turn the clock back on leftist women's rights aka women's right to be viewed as human beings alone) don't expect sympathy from most of the guy's here that cheer on such barbaric and chauvinistic treatment towards little boy's. As their tongue is only being staved off now because you have rights and wittle bigots are scared of people with rights enforced by society at large(government).

Once your rights are reduced to that of a child(to fit with how society treats and accommodates you) many of these "fine gentlemen" will act in the chauvinistic manners of the 1700's or perhaps worse.

Originally posted by mnmcandiez
reply to post by Pervius

 

Yeah SS is really comparable to violently beating and robbing someone

You ever think that he paid into SS, especially if he is that old

The "Greatest generation(BS)", The Silent Generation and the Boomers did indeed pay into social security. And they then took that money out to finance their big car's, big social programs that failed, and expensive living standards that the younger generations won't even be able to dream about.

It is convenient how they blame it on the "Government" robbing the Social Security trust fund, but the "Government" is merely society at large. The "elderly" already cashed out on their retirement to finance their high living standard + borrowed against their retirement. And now they want the younger generation's to pay off their debt + also their retirement?

reply to post by korathin


Guess you never heard of the banker bail out?

Originally posted by dolphinfan
reply to post by Wyn Hawks

 

Obviously I did not read the transcripts. I don't need to.

...yeah, you do and your next statement proves it...

Originally posted by dolphinfan
I'm not going to convict someone based on the testimony of a 73 year old dude who had his glasses knocked off, was beaten and the ID he is providing was made during the attack and is the only piece of evidence the prosecution has against the suspect, a suspect who has no criminal history.

...emphasis above is mine and THAT little tidbit shows why reading the transcripts of the trial is preferable to just guessing...

Originally posted by dolphinfan
I'm not going to trust anything that comes out of an interogation of a minor, nor would I at any point consider a kid who is speaking to the police with his attorney present consider that kid to have competent counsel.

...so, everyone's wrong - the old man that got beat up, the cops, the defense attorney, the prosecuting attorney, the jury and the judge... the only one thats right, in your opinion, is the 15yr old that beat up the old man during a robbery...

Originally posted by dolphinfan
I certainly would not feel any guilt were I to vote to not convict and he to commit a more serious crime. That is a far better outcome than simply assuming that LE is playing the game square

...thats so messed up... gosh, i really hope you're just stating that for dramatic effect to boost responses to your thread...

Originally posted by dolphinfan
Everyday the police are looking to bend the law, use trickery and intimidation tactics, looking to jam someone up for an act for which they have insufficient evidence.

...that may be true in some cases but, as you stated it, its a half-truth at best and thats the same as a lie...

Originally posted by dolphinfan
It is your duty as a citizen to be skeptical of the police.

...you're not being skeptical... you're attempting to validate a personal agenda via your imaginings of this case...

Originally posted by dolphinfan
There is a reason we are innocent until proven guilty.

...emphasis above is mine...

...whatever you think that reason is, it has nothing to do with how things really work - because - that over-glorified and over-used phrase is a facade... the reality has always been that we are guilty until proven innocent - as long as we are not wealthy or well connected and havent pissed off the wrong people...

...however, that doesnt mean trial by jury doesnt work... those are two seperate issues, albeit connected... trial by jury doesnt always free the falsely charged but its better than no trial by jury or vigilantism...

Originally posted by dolphinfan
The government has and should have a much more difficult job than the defense.

...district attorneys do have a more difficult job... any half-assed trained monkey can be a defense attorney and, sadly, thats what many ambulance chasers public defenders are...

What a misleading title.

All he had was 7 cents. Guy could have had a million cash would that change the crime of assault and robbery? They just happened to rob a guy who had nothing.

Good, these kids sound like little #s.
The more time they spend in jail, the better. The world needs less of these assholes.

Well, if they didn't do it and the first kid who plead guilty did so because his lawyer said he would get off with a slap on the wrist (just as one might have to plead guilty when they swear they are innocent just to get parole, for example), then I have to wonder what for-profit prison's pocket this judge is in?

Then again, I don't know the case, but you have to wonder these days. We'll see how much more unbelievable these cases start getting as these private prisons keep raking in their profits.

The sum attained is irrelevant. The kid assaulted somebody.

I'm not a fan of our vengeance based penal system by any means but if we have to participate 2 years in juvy seems about right.

Long enough so it thoroughly sucks but not so long that he falls in all buddy buddy with the other offenders, loses too much time to feel like rejoining society is a viable option or loses whatever civility he has left.

I also dont think he should be branded a felon for life. I dont believe anyone should regardless of their crime. That label over their heads doesnt help them enter back into society.

Should future offenses occur different measured would need to be taken.

This story should not be presented as "7 cents for 6 years." It should be presented for what it is: "kid tackles and beats elderly man for 7 cents." One version sounds like a ludicrously harsh punishment the other sounds like a ludicrously harsh action.

Perhaps only netting 7 cents will go a long way to instilling the idea that crime does not pay. While he sits in juvy he can compare his experiences to the pitiful sum of his assault and weigh the pros and cons heavily.

reply to post by dolphinfan


Yep, it was a violent robbery, he deserves the punishment, although I don't agree with criminal penalties for kids that aren't considered adults yet. I think all the different ages of maturity are BS. You aren't old enough to make a decision about whether to drink or smoke or see nudity, but you are supposed to be held to the same adult penalties for crimes?

Anyhow, the $0.07 had nothing to do with it. If they beat the man and stole what he had, then they deserve a punishment.

Originally posted by Revealation
The only fact here is that courts are corrupt and biased in their judgements. They have no proof besides an old man that was beat up from behind. No less the old guy wears glasses which means he has poor eyesight to begin with and supposedly at night?

Now when your getting kicked and punched your nothing more than a bobblehead and can't see squat. the judge abused his power on a personal vandetta because he as (Mr.Authority or GOD) felt disrespected and dismayed taht there's someone who doesn't fear his power.

Yeah if the kid did do it he deserves it but I think the judge and justice system need their teeth kicked down their throats, one by one.

Judges,district attorneys, lawyers(who are supposed to defend you) and cops are all in on the big scam.

For those of you who believe in the justice system, all I can say is your a bunch of morons who have never experienced it and it's your type that help to create the crooked system.

As for Ninham, wait till he gets to jail, he's in for it when they find out he's a rat.

Oh, well I guess we should just stop prosecuting any case where DNA or HD video evidence isn't present! The justice system isn't perfect, but it's better that the b.s. scenario you present. The judge didn't abuse his power one bit.