5 year old girl could face murder charges

Read Time:1 Minute, 59 Second

MURDER MOST FOUL EVEN IF YOU’RE JUST A LITTLE GIRL

How old do you have to be, girls or boys, to kill and mean it?


Murder, according to the dictionary,  is the unlawful killing of another human being with “malice aforethought”, and generally this state of mind distinguishes murder from other forms of unlawful homicide (such as manslaughter), and that means girls can do it also.

As the loss of a human being inflicts enormous grief upon the individuals close to the victim, as well as the fact that the commission of a murder is highly detrimental to the good order within society, most societies both present and in antiquity have considered it a most serious crime worthy of the harshest of punishment.  I don’t disagree but when is the age of reason?

In most countries, a person convicted of murder is typically given a long prison sentence, possibly a life sentence where permitted, and in some countries, the death penalty may be imposed for such an act though this practice is becoming more rare.  A person who commits murder is called a murderer and that is true, but what if they’re only 5 years old?

A 5-year-old girl, and you didn’t read it wrong, could face murder charges in the recent drowning of a toddler in a bathtub, police said on Thursday of last week.

The Kansas City police are waiting for a medical examiner’s report on how Jermane Johnson Jr., died, but have investigated the death as a homicide, said spokesman Darin Snapp.

“I’ve been in law enforcement for 20 years and it’s the youngest suspect I can remember,” Snapp said. “It’s extremely rare.”

Johnson, 18 months old, was in a Kansas City house on June 3rd with other children, but the 16-year-old girl who was supposed to be looking after them fell asleep, Snapp said.

Investigators learned through interviews that a 5-year-old girl in the house got irritated at the boy and she held the little thing under the water until he stopped crying.

A decision on exactly how to handle this case will be left up to prosecutors after the medical examiner’s report is released, and that could take a few days, or weeks.

What do you think about this bizarre case?  Do you think a 5 year old girl can make a rational decision to kill?

 

About Post Author

Carol Bell

Carol is a graduate of the University of Alabama. Her passion is journalism and it shows. Carol is our unpaid, but very efficient, administrative secretary.
Happy
Happy
0 %
Sad
Sad
0 %
Excited
Excited
0 %
Sleepy
Sleepy
0 %
Angry
Angry
0 %
Surprise
Surprise
0 %
0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of

11 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
12 years ago

shes fricken 5 years old she probably just thought “omg shut up”
and put him under water but not with the intention of ending his life! It was her fault obviously but i bet she felt really bad and didnt know the consequences of her actions!

12 years ago

I came back to this because I was looking at the details of the death of Eric Clapton’s son. He was 4 1/2 when he ran out of an open window, probably unaware that he could die himself. Awful.

dp1053
12 years ago

First off, the 16yo was mentally challenged and should not have been left in charge.

Now the story I heard was that she dragged him to the tub, put him in and drowned him. The debate over what she did and did not understand will continue long past this case, but I ask you to think about this-she deliberately dragged him to the tub. He was not already in the water. That means she also had to run water in the tub, then hold him under. Sounds like some thought and planning went into this.

While we, as a society, refuse to admit that there are just sometimes sociopathic monsters brought into this world, alas, it does happen. If the child is examined and found to be aware of her actions, what do we do with her now? If she is a true sociopath, she cannot be released into a world of “normal” pre-schoolers. So, now what?

If she is not a sociopath, then she still needs to be placed somewhere for some therapy and to remove her from an obviously bad environment. Responsible parents would not have left a handicapped 16yo in charge.

No matter what angle you look at this from, it is a sad situation.

12 years ago

I’ll never forget that when I was 10, my teacher told the class the story of a 5th-grader facing murder charges and that the defense was that the child couldn’t have known the wrongness of their act. He asked whether we knew that murder was wrong, and it seemed like such an incredibly stupid question–of course taking the life of another is wrong! I cherish the times in my life that I have been able to take a “mental note” of my perspective at a given point in time, and benefit from it in the future.

Now, what if I had been asked the same question at age 5?

It should tell us something that these cases are so rare–I truly believe that even at 5, most will know that shoving a child’s head under water until they stop crying is beyond wrong. This, of course, doesn’t answer the looming question of what to do when it does happen…

12 years ago

I don’t think she can foresee death as a consequence at 5. The sixteen year-old girl is more accountable for this, just as if the girl had set fire to the house. But she is also a minor, and both should be treated with compassion. I bet the 5-year old girl is hysterical and will be psychologically shocked by what she has wrought. I have a 5-year old boy–and much less can put him over the edge. That reality for her is more than enough punishment.

Eddie
12 years ago

Damn, this sounds like one of J.D. Robb’s “In Death” books.

lasersedge
12 years ago

It is a ridiculous concept to even think about holding a five year old responsible for a crime. The human brain does not mature until the early 20’s and in some cases even then it may not be fully able to understand the nature or criminality of such an act.

Eddie
Reply to  lasersedge
12 years ago

I see America going off into a dangerous path if we go in that direction (referring to your second sentence). Yes, science does support your claim. However, must we automatically offer pity, support, and/or lesser/no punishment for people that are already traditionally and legally adults? Especially since the cut off age is around the time people are old enough to have a bachelor’s degree? Sometimes people are just f-ed up.

lasersedge
Reply to  Eddie
12 years ago

Eddie, it is less about there being no responsibility than it is how we deal with the individual. This case is a perfect example. Another is assuming that all 12 year olds who understand the difference between right and wrong also understand the nature and consequences of the act they are doing if they hold a pillow over the head of a playmate too long. There are some people whose brains simply never arrive at a point where they understand what they are doing and the long term consequences. On the other hand there are those at age 16 who may well understand it but I would suggest that the burden of proving that would rest with state.

Eddie
Reply to  lasersedge
12 years ago

I think you misunderstood me. I was not referring to barely out of diaper brats here like the girl in the article. I was thinking along the lines of people from late high school to early twenties, which should cover every age of ascension into adulthood for most of western civilization’s history.

Marsha Woerner
12 years ago

She’s FIVE! She doesn’t know what life or death is. She doesn’t understand consequences. The thought of charging her and trying her is unbelievable! I have difficulty with the idea of trying a teenager as an adult, but trying a FIVE-YEAR-OLD? When anyone thinks of it, they will notice how ridiculous the thought is. I hope!

Previous post Guess Who’s Looking Over Eric Spoelstra’s Shoulder?
Weiner Next post Does government really have a monopoly on sex?
11
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x