Posted by bob100 on August 3, 2008 at 8:10 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Public outcry? The people complaining are the defense bar and the liberal press. The vast majority of people believe that when you commit an adult crime, you should be treated as an adult and do adult time.

Where is your concern for the victim? for his family? for his friends? Life in prison is cruel and unusual? Larry will not have life in prison - he is dead. Shot in the back of the head by a coward.

Be thankful that the DA bears the tremendous burden of making these extremely difficult decisions day in and day out - and enjoy the luxury of being a monday morning quarterback.

Posted by ironwoman on August 3, 2008 at 8:24 a.m. (Suggest removal)

If newsweek is correct, please read the articles, particularly "young, gay and dead"...Brandon Mcinerney taunted Larry before he killed him. He sat behind him in class, reading and staring at him before he shot and killed him.

He deserves to be tried as an Adult. He's a cold-blooded killer. Our society doesn't need a sick individual like him running the streets.
As far as this attorney's article, perhaps he can visit Mcinerney when he's in prison and try to rehabilitate him so he is ready to "give back" to the community.

Posted by shaver_one on August 3, 2008 at 8:32 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I don't understand why this author continues to blame Larry King for his own murder.
Larry didn't bring a loaded gun to EO Green. McInerney did. King didn't shoot himself in the back of the head. McInerney shot King. Of course, King is no longer around to defend himself against homophobic accusations.
McInerney knew what he was about to do...and, indeed, did. The result is that Larry Kind is dead. And that is permanent. Brandon McInerney committed an adult crime, with full knowledge of the consequences.
Except for the fanatic religious-right, nobody believes homosexuality is a crime that deserves the death penalty. But, that is the penalty handed down to King by McInerney.
To blame Larry King for his own death is not that far removed from blaming the Holocaust on the Jews.
Remember the Old Testament: "An eye for an eye...a tooth for a tooth"...a life for a life.
Do the crime, do the time.

Posted by nelsonknows on August 3, 2008 at 3:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)

ironwoman, you have it backward, Larry King sexually harassed McInerney before he was murdered and yet, that is NO excuse to steal a firearm and murder someone. Please get the facts straight. McInerney should be tried as adult, if you want to act like an adult, pay the price as an adult.

Posted by bombero42 on August 3, 2008 at 3:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)

So the way to be an adult is to commit a felony?
Think that through if you can. A 14 year old is not an adult. It's that simple. If you want to see how idiotic the "do the crime, do the time" type of thinking is, why not apply it to ten year olds, or 7 year olds? The reasoning is exaclty the same.

Posted by nelsonknows on August 3, 2008 at 4:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)

bombero42, do you think a 14 year old doesn't know that murder is wrong? So if a gang coerces a 14 year old to murder someone that's ok? Or if a 14 year old murders a baby, that's ok? Or perhaps a 14 year old kills a President?

Posted by nelsonknows on August 3, 2008 at 4:06 p.m. (Suggest removal)

bombero42, State's Law states 14 year olds can be tried as adults, at what age do you think it should be changed to?

Posted by jposborn on August 3, 2008 at 5:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)

There are two kinds of people who think that charging, prosecuting, trying and sentencing children as adults is a good thing. Those who are ignorant to the fact that it does not deter crime, that it will certainly result in little incentive on the part of the child to become rehabilitated, that it results in a much higher chance that the child will be assaulted, that there is an equally high chance the child will attempt to commit suicide and that such thinking fails to recognize that children are VERY much amenable to rehabilitation and therefore should not suffer "living death sentences" . . and those who get their jollies at the thought of young teenagers being subjected to abuse . . which begs the question; are these folks just stupid or are they closet sadists.

Try the boy as a juvenile, give him the help he needs and save his life so the end result of this tragedy is that only one child is dead, rather than two. We are not talking about a gang banger with an arms length of priors . . we are talking about a young boy who made ONE horrible and spontaneous choice to end another beautiful child's life. Give this kid a chance to change and he will.

Posted by JesusMalverde on August 3, 2008 at 6:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I actually think that there are two kinds of people also-those who believe in right and wrong and those who don't. I am terrified of those that are constantly trying to look for grey areas. This "kid" took a gun to school and shot another human being POINT BLANK in the head. End of discussion and end of analysis.

The question is not whether he can or cannot be rehabilitated. The question is whether he should? I for one would rather see my tax dollars and resources spent on kids who have yet to shoot another person in th head-TWICE.

I guarantee you that if this was an hispanic kid from Coloniia who did a drive by, you all would not be crying about the DA's position. There are racist and homophobic overtones to this whole discussion...."he shouldn't be punished because the victim hit on him...." He shouldn't be punished because he is a white kid with a future..."

Cold blooded killers belong in jail-PERIOD.

Posted by VOR on August 3, 2008 at 11:44 p.m. (Suggest removal)

What amazes me is that the Ventura County Star even publishes crap like this. Why not just open all the prisons and let everyone out. There are no more penalties for doing wrong. This person is so far out of touch with reality. He must be living in an Obama dream world.

Posted by bombero42 on August 4, 2008 at 8:05 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I see that reason has been replaced by silliness.
Nowhere did I say he should not be punished. Nowhere did I say it was not wrong.
Yes a 14 year old knows it is wrong. So does a 7 year old. Would you say a 7 year old should be tried as an adult.
The law that made the age 14 was passed by the voters. Voters often vote on emotion rather than thinking.
Studies have shown beyond a doubt that the teen brain is still growing even at 18. before that they have trouble thinking through consequences.
An 18 year old is an adult. If you want to increase penalties for some juvenile crime, then it should be done that way. A juvenile does not become an adult by commiting a crime.

Posted by ripley on August 4, 2008 at 9:16 a.m. (Suggest removal)

VOR - you need to organize and prioritize what you say so you don't sound misinformed or ignorant... this has nothing to do with Obama politics (who is the better candidtate, for that matter). This little monster will not be allowed to slip thru the cracks as a juvenile, and the DA saw to that. Thank God. GOOD! Because that arrogant idiot of an attorney of his will have more of an impossible battle, and deserves it now. He's always been the most impudent, insolent idiot attorney I've heard of, EVER!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by VOR on August 4, 2008 at 10:54 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Ripley, forgive me, I was being facetious. Of course it has nothing to do with Obama politics, but the article seems to have everything to do with forgetting the seriousness of the crime and talking to the felon to rehabilitate him in the juvenile justice system, instead of punishing the felon based on the serious nature of the crime and facing reality that it is a dangerous world out there and serious crimes like this are being committed by people that are younger and younger, probably because of bleeding hearts that want to show them that it is all OK and we will just rehabilitate you for a few years and set you free. In other words, can't we just talk it out and everything will be fine. It is such a perfect world and we can all get along, can't we? That is more Obama'esqe, I would say.

Now that all that has been said. I am one of the firm believers that at 14 you know the difference between right and wrong, you know that if you point a gun at someones head and pull the trigger that you will kill them. And at 14 you know that if you kill someone you will be put in jail for a really long time. After all this was not an accident, this was calculated, premeditated murder. I am so sick and tired of people using the excuse that if it happened 19 days earlier that he would not be charged as an adult. Well I am sorry, but that may not be the case, he could still have been charged as an adult if the DA petitioned the court due to the heinousness of the crime, although it may have been a bit harder. Putting that aside, the fact is he was 19 days older, he was 14 when he did the crime and the current laws state that 14 is the cutoff age. How many days does one have to be 14 to be 14? Larry was only 21 days into being 15, so does that mean he was 14, no, he was 15, but you don't hear about that.

Ripley, trust me, I am anything but misinformed or ignorant of this case, although at times I may throw something out like my initial comment to show just how stupid something is. However, you must admit that it is very frustrating to see people so willing to blame Larry for his murder and want to give Brandon a minimal sentence in the juvenile system. Then of course there are the ignorant folks that think the adult trial means that he will be sent to prison at age 14 with grown men and how unfair that is which obviously is not the case.

The problem I see it of trying him as a juvenile is that in a few years he will be out on the streets again as he cannot be held past his 25th birthday and would most likely be out on his 18th. I am sorry but that is not enough time. It is not enough time for the horrible deed that he did, it is not enough time for others to see considering a similar action, it is not enough time for the safety of the rest of us out here where we value life and know the difference between right and wrong.

Posted by granmama on August 4, 2008 at 11:25 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Thank you Attorney Meha for stating the facts - this is the facts of what is going to happen and is happening throughout the United States. First Offending Kids that have been bullied unmercifully, physically, sexually, and emotionally abused, neglected and sometimes the result of tragic accidents are being tried and sentenced as adults. In some states they are confined in an adult facility but, because of the lack of protection for the juvenile until their trial, or reach the adult prison transfer age they are held in a cell 23-24 hours a day - no television, radio, little association with others, no rehabilitation, counseling, or education. After being in lockdown for two-three years or more in these circumstances how would it effect you? All of you who are pro-adult sentencing for this boy really should read the facts on the rate of recidivism for juveniles tried and sentenced as adults v. juveniles tried as a juvenile. http://www.ytfg.org/documents/Platfor... You really need to read the reports on brain development, maturity, react vs. consider consequences - I believe a lot of people voted for proposition 21 because of the get tougher on gangs and drug dealers, I am one who did not read it clearly enough to know they lowered the age to 14 - I hope we can get this reversed and raise the age to 21 - Even an 18 year old lacks the maturity in many ways to have adult responsiblities. I for one am glad that the age was 21 when I was young because I really would have been held responsible for some really poor decisions.

Posted by ripley on August 5, 2008 at 8:35 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Mehas defense of Brandon is shallow and without much merit, that's why he'll be tried as an adult. And, it appears as though he's Mehas' sacrificial guina pig so he can try to make a name for himself - he's so, so low from what I know of him, though. VOR, you are right - he may get out because of just the flimsy defense his silly attorney might use and be back on the street. He knew exactly what he was doing. If it wasn't poor Larry it would have been somebody else - he probably hates everyone. If we could only read people's minds... And, VOR, I saw that you got carried away alittle... there's so much going on these days that it's always easy to blame politics - I do it all the time.

Posted by nelsonknows on August 5, 2008 at 1:10 p.m. (Suggest removal)

So now Bombero thinks the will of the voters should not be obeyed just because he doesn't like the law. So NAZI Nancy Pelosi, Barbara Boxer, Gavin Newsome and others I don't like should just be thrown out of office because I don't like them? And YOU say others are being silly?

Posted by nelsonknows on August 5, 2008 at 1:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Shaver, why do we keep agreeing on this, it's scaring me!
Many, including myself, have called for a complete investigation of E.O. Green School on this matter. Allegations of sexual harassment, although no excuse for murder, are very serious, especially in the light that teachers and administrators are Mandatory Reporters of crimes against children, even by other children and sexual harassment at school is a Federal Offense according to Title 9.
Please check out this link:
http://www.equalrights.org/publicatio...

Posted by rx7ward on August 5, 2008 at 1:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"So, Brandon took the matter into his own hands in the only way he knew how. He got a relative's gun, took it to class with him, and shot and killed Larry."

So who is responsible for the fact that Brandon "only knew how" to respond to teasing by killing the teaser? How is it that ANY kid comes to believe that killing is a legitimate response to harassment, regardless of the source? Maybe he found himself somewhat interested in the advances Larry allegedly made to him, and was afraid of his own feelings ... if so, who is to blame for creating such a hostile atmosphere towards homosexuals that it becomes OK to kill them when they annoy you?

Posted by granmama on August 5, 2008 at 5:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Please go to this site: http://capwiz.com/famm/issues/alert/?...

For those of you opposed to first offending youth being tried and sentenced as adults, opposed to Mandatory Sentencing Laws, and opposed to those under age 19 being tried as an adult, meet with your Congressman, write to them, our voices need to be heard. www.juvenilejusticefoundation.com ,
www.christopherpittman.info

Posted by teadream on August 5, 2008 at 6:59 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Ripley-It's funny that you would attack the author instead of the merits of what he had to say. His editorial raises the sobering question of whether we're going to continue to destroy children who commit violent crimes by placing them in adult prisons for the rest of their lives. Life in prison with no possibility of parole is a cruel and unusual thing to wish upon any child (or his family), no matter what he's done. Brandon does need to be punished for the crimes he's committed, and then he needs to at least be given a chance at rehabilitation. Isn't that what Mr. Mehas said? His piece had nothing to do with promoting the author. What he's doing is helping to raise some awareness on important social issues that relate to our children and our futures, something you obviously need to learn.

Posted by ffcfkt on August 6, 2008 at 8:03 a.m. (Suggest removal)

First point.
Harassment, sexual or otherwise, happens in school. Kids are not nice to each other. High school, weather you are gay or straight, is miserable for most kids. The only reason harassment is an issue for the author is because of the sexuality of the victim. If the schools focused on every single squabble between 14 year old boys they would be reduced to little more than professional baby sitters. In the end it does not matter, harassment is never an excuse for violence...no matter what form it takes shape in. Even mentioning it in regards to this case is akin to the "gay panic" defense. It is wrong and has no place in this discussion.
Second point.
A boy is dead. Take away sexuality, take away age, take away all the other mitigating crap and you are left with one simple fact, a boy is dead. Brandon took the life of another person, in doing so he gave up all rights he had to a life of his own. He does not deserve rehabilitation. He deserves to spend the rest of his life in prison paying for what he has done. The day that Larry King has a chance at a life I'll be more than happy to advocate for Brandon's rehabilitation. Until Larry King gets a second chance Brandon does not deserve one. Try him, and lock him up, he deserves nothing more, nothing less.

Posted by ripley on August 6, 2008 at 10:37 a.m. (Suggest removal)

DEAR teadream, Mehas is JUST an attorney with his own interests and rep in mind, no matter the costs... As far as Brandon, he knows good and well what he did was wrong. It took guts for him to do what he did. But, it would take even more guts for him to admit to that and pay the price for his actions. Yes, his family is partly to blame and should and will take responsibility for a senseless death - a hate crime, not just harassment! Brandon must be punished and I'm glad it's as an adult.

Posted by enki on August 7, 2008 at 11:38 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Aren’t we all so comfortable in our righteous judgment of Brandon McInerney? Confucius said that laws were ineffective in socializing people for they reduce what should be a Moral decision to a simple weighing process of “what do I get if I get away with it” vs. “what do I get if I get caught” He suggested that moral & social pressure were the only effective approach to socializing people. When we rely primarily on laws and this Cost vs. Benefit evaluation, it REQUIRES a full understanding the consequences of the action. It’s impossible to know if Brandon believed that killing Larry was wrong. He likely knew it was illegal, but he could have been influenced to hate “gays” or any number of other terrible things and this could easily cloud his understanding of right and wrong. The Supreme Court ruled that their environment has too much influence over a child to hold them completely responsible for their actions. Maybe Brandon thought he would make the person that taught him such awful things proud, and that committing this crime was worth the sacrifice. Or, it could have simply been a product of raw unbridled hate. No one can know, and it doesn’t change the issue of whether Brandon should be tried as an adult. What is critical is did he fully understand the consequences of his actions? Did he understand he would go to prison for life? Did he understand the devastation he would cause Larry King’s family? Did he understand the misery and shame he would cause his own family? If not, then the law failed him and Larry, and consequently we as a society failed them. The extreme nature of this crime and casualness, for lack of a better term, screams that Brandon had no clue as to the consequences. Why would he create such misery for himself and his family just to hurt Larry King? If he did understand to the level we expect of an adult, then he must be insane given such willful disregard for his own welfare, and that should be his defense. Or if he didn’t (as is suggested by extensive research) then he should NOT BE TRIED AS AN ADULT. Does this mean that kids should be immune for terrible crimes, just because they are mentally undeveloped? NO, but the reality is WE as parents have effectively created this situation by denying “society” i.e. schools and other social organizations the tools to discipline and help socialize our kids. Teachers complain that parents are all too often the greatest obstacle to socializing their students. If we will not allow the community to assist in this critical function, then the responsibility falls exclusively on us as parents, and with no support or supervision of this process we will have to live with the tragic consequences such as the senseless murder of Larry King. Mr. Mehas’ commentary was thoughtful and important, and those who have made derogatory comments toward him for bringing these issues to light should look to their own “Morals”.

Posted by ripley on August 7, 2008 at 12:31 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Right!!!!!!!!!! Look to my own morals?! So, you're saying that I should just go and whack everybody I don't like just like Brandon? Then, Mehas will represent me. When I was Brandon's age I never hurt anyone like he did nor did I hate anyone as he did. The only thoughtfulness about Mehas is his wallet. And only criminals and like-minded idiots will read his trash.

Posted by enki on August 7, 2008 at 1:33 p.m. (Suggest removal)

NO, but I would be willing to bet you break some minor law at least once a week, if not a day, because virtually everyone does. So in reality, it is not a moral issue but instead just an issue of degrees, and that has to do with understanding the consequences. Many people, if they KNEW they could rob a bank for a million dollars and that they would get away clean, would probably do it. For most people, it always comes down to degrees. Few have the quality of character to give back the money if they found $20.00 OR $200,000 in a paper bag and knew who it belonged to. $20, sure, 200K maybe not.

AS for Brandon, YOU did not grow up in the environment Brandon did and you simply cannot judge the effect it would have on his ability to understand his actions fully. Vengence accomplishes nothing. Imprisonment only serves society if it rehabilitates, or if rehabilitation is impossible, it protects society from further crimes. Neither of these are obvious in this case. Brandon probably could be rehabilitated, but will have no opportunity now.

As for Mr. Mehas, Ripley has again incorrectly judged HIM in suggesting his business or wallet is benefitted by this opinion piece. From what I understand, Mr. Mehas is an Author who used to be an attorney. I don't see what he gains from this forum except surprisingly excessive and irrational contempt from some judgemental and self righteous readers... And the belief that he is doing the right thing.

So when IS a person too young to be held accountable as an adult? Should a 7 year old who shot a another kid go to the chair? I suppose Ripley would say absolutely!

Posted by ripley on August 8, 2008 at 10:45 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I recall a certain 21yr. old last November/December running over a CHP Officer and killing the driver that the officer had pulled over on the freeway. That young man actually plead guilty - took lots of courage for him. He knew he made a huge mistake. I don't think anyone can truthfully argue that Brandon doesn't know that he did something wrong - and premeditated. Some believe it's all about rehabilitating these young adults because of their background. They know they did wrong, but only in America... Even a kindergartner knows what Brandon did was wrong.
And, it's not about me or anybody else or what degree (nonsense!) they did wrong today or last week, give me a break! I didn't kill anyone and we're talking about Brandon...
I just love it when someone acts like they know everything... how insecure... and Mehas must be your best friend or something. Doesn't change my opinion about him.

Posted by Medora on August 8, 2008 at 4:59 p.m. (Suggest removal)

As anyone with even the basic modicum of understanding of teenagers know, erratic hormones serve to magnify elements such as peer pressure, unstable home environment and nebulous self-image so common with our youth. There is often diminished self-control--the same way the "twinkie defense" could be used to defend Dan White in a similarly gay-charged case, so too could simple teenage physiology render the perpetrator in a state of diminished capacity. Because teens are not yet considered "mature" enough to participate meaningfully as adults in society, shouldn't they be considered less than completely responsible in certain mitigating circumstances surrounding violent crimes?

The crime and gender-orientation of the victim are simply not the issues in this case; the constitutionality of the D.A.'s decision re: 8th amendment is the real point. The rest is noise that obscures the true goal of our criminal justice system: the betterment of society. This and similar decisions regarding juveniles may win local elections, but as far as improving society goes, it falls short by failing to attempt rehabilitation at the point most likely to achieve it--before one is an adult. A bitter irony, that.

Posted by jazzygroove on August 15, 2008 at 3:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Let's put things in perspective.

The little murderer probably won't die in jail right away. Probably he'll die years down the line -- from health problems like all of us do -- or from getting into a fight because he's already violent.

The likely outcome is not that a 14 year old killed a 15 year old and both will die as kids.

The likely outcome is that a cute jock was probably dealing with his own latent homosexuality and freaked out because the openly gay kid interacted with him in school.

Either way, the closeted jock was worried about the openly gay kid giving him away.

So he killed the kid.

Now, irony of ironies, it doesn't matter if he's a juvenile or not. He's going to a bad place, where, guess what? Cute kids get raped, beaten, taunted, enslaved and generally treated even more badly than the kid he killed.

So the homophobic closeted bully is sentenced to a life of being bullied and taunted and flirted with by other guys.

Even if he never gets raped, he's never going to have a normal sex life... he would have to find a freaky woman on the outside when he's 18 or older to marry and have conjugal visits with.. once a week if he's lucky, in another dirty cell for his wedding bed.

It's too bad he came from bad circumstances and was violent and a terrible kid... because all that probably helped him become a killer.

I find his fate oddly fitting.

And I can see why he's pleading Not Guilty. It's the only way he won't have to watch his butt for the next 7 years.

Posted by quadspect on October 15, 2008 at 4:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The cruelty of Brandon McInerney and the students who wrote hate comments to wound the victim, obviously passed as a "normal" way in which to treat a non-conformist or any exceptional child ---- in a school district obviously so lacking in ethical intelligence that they did nothing to educate students in the matter of basic human rights, to insulate against bigotry. The scant intelligence of those staffing school districts is a major contributor to the failure of public education.

Posted by quadspect on October 15, 2008 at 4:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Dig a little deeper, and you will find evidence that the persecution of the lad was known to school personnel, and they
did nothing to prevent it.

Posted by quadspect on October 15, 2008 at 4:52 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Re ffcfkt's trivializes sexual harassment and trivializes the legal duty to protect the child, that was violated by the District: "Harassment, sexual or otherwise, happens in school. If the schools focused on every single squabble between 14 year old boys they would be reduced to little more than professional baby sitters."

Sexual harassment is expressly against the law, "ffcfkt" --- The law does not, as you do and do many in your community, consider sexual or disability harassment a mere "squabble" and civil rights law both federal and state, impose an affirmative duty on school districts to prevent a hostile school environment which I know for a fact certain school districts and their tax-paid lawyers, intentionally foment against their most vulnerable children--- children with special needs--- So, with that mentality, the murder of this child is obviously a predictable outcome. Furthermore, it is under the mandatory school attendance laws that the school district had the victim and other vulnerable children in legal custody for a significant number of hours 5 days a week in their lives--- The child victim was trapped there and being persecuted right under the noses of the individuals who staff the district. You might say, such individuals wield far more power than their merit justifies, or than is safe for the public good.

Posted by quadspect on October 15, 2008 at 4:59 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Re Medora's excuse that middle schoolers are ineducable: "As anyone with even the basic modicum of understanding of teenagers know, erratic hormones serve to magnify elements such as peer pressure, unstable home environment and nebulous self-image so common with our youth. There is often diminished self-control-"

If middle schoolers are ineducable, then send them home and have the staffers find employment elsewhere.

Posted by jbbishop on January 6, 2009 at 6:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Sadly enough (for Brandon) he will be tried as an adult.

"It's too bad for Brandon McInerney that he wasn't born 19 days later."

I'm absolutely sure this came as a great shock to Brandon as I'm quite sure that he would have believed he was immune from this kind of prosecution when he did what he did. It's the kind of thing kids his age would know about particularly being involved in the kinds of groups he was involved in. I rather suspect he didn't have complete or current information on this point of law.

While I wish there was tighter enforcement of CAP laws and don't feel the issue was one sided, the fact is that Brandon is a cold blooded killer who thought he could get away with murder and get away from his troubled home life in the bargain. Brandon killed his victim in cold blood, believing; I am sure, that he would continue as an adult to live a relatively normal life while his victim was to be denied theirs.

The author of the article this comment is posted in response to, Mr. Michael Mehas, is apparently looking to profit from the issue in publicity at the very least if not from a new book (even though he may actually believe he is supporting a just cause in advocating Brandon's freedom). Mr. Mehas: You are no Truman Capote.