retired_ks reddy

You'd lower the age of responsibility to the age you can chuck a stone?

retired_bemesel

They were chucking bricks. They had already fractured his cheek. It was anoher stone that smacked his head that did damage.

I'm glad they went down.

I used to be against hanging and the like, but now I'd be happy for them to have their balls removed.

retired_bemesel

And I'm not talking cricket balls either.

retired_ks reddy

Just the 12 year olds, or the 10 year olds too?

retired_princess160

If you'd said 'hands' I could at least have understood that you want to prevent them doing it again, but what is this going to do?

retired_kevh16

tbh I'm not really sure about this case.

Lots of kids aged 10 do stupid stuff like this. I don't think for a minute that these kids thought they might injure/kill anyone through their actions.

retired_rmschaffer

I think they should keep it the same age.

That way it is up to the judge's discretion. If they are decent kids and have made a mistake. Then the judge still has the option of giving them a soft sentence. But they know that there is no guaranteed soft sentence.

The guy they killed. He just wanted to go down to the park to play cricket with his son. It is a family activity in the daytime in a public park. You should feel safe there and not expect to be stoned.

Those kids deserved to go to prison.

retired_traci29

i would probably have just had them taken outside and quietly shot, then blamed youth gang culture for taking the lives of innocents.

and how would they not know that heaving half a brick at an old man lying on the floor with a fractured cheek bone might do some serious damage?

retired_kilo

"And without that court case, could Mr Norton's family ever have felt satisfied that justice had been done?"

I've never understood the "victim's rights" movement. The man died -- whether the kids are properly punished or not, he's dead and not coming back. The man's family needs as much therapy as the kids if they feel a need for some kind of revenge.

And, yeah, ten is awfully young to be charged with a crime.

retired_germancat

All kids aged between 10 and 20 should be locked up IMO, fit girls could get parole though.