How is a court supposed to determine this in short order?
And to what degree should this 20 yr. old threshold drive the verdict of a criminal proceeding?
Sometimes it’s extremely difficult, but I would guess most of the time it’s trivially easy.
I’m still trying to build a platform on which to prop this age as the most legit age to be considered an adult and you are not helping me develop the idea…at all. Why not?
You guess…based on what?
10 year olds are adults? They are in our insane legal system.
I mean, let’s say 20 is the age of adulthood. What does this solve for us?
No arbitrary insanity for starters.
The legal system of the USA is a runaway train of insanity.
A guess based on life experience. I’m sure you’ve sized people up before, to see who they are and what they’re capable of. For this case, I’m wondering how you came to the conclusion that she was mentally unstable?
Sure, it’s awful. And most legal systems today and in the past have been even worse.
Teenagers are always mentally unstable, prone to fits of ridiculousness or worse.
Guesses are not good enough. Guesses are fallible.
Strictly deferring to an average adult age trades precision for order. You get simpler decision-making at the expense of accuracy.
What accuracy…a 10 yrs. old adult? That type of accuracy? That’s insanity, not accuracy.
If accuracy means someone who knows right from wrong, then three year olds should be tried as adults.
I believe there is a case where a 3 or 4 year old “murdered” someone…an obvious adult.
Ehh, no. Going through a rebellious stage, thinking you know more than you do, doing something stupid from peer pressure, these are normal teenage shenanigans. An extended, concerted effort to get your boyfriend to kill himself is not. Can you image how she feigned surprise when the news broke? That’s sick.
I mean, the final sentence may not be easy to judge, but the fact that someone should have known better… is another thing.
An unstable teenager…a psychopath in a teenagers body…in any case unstable being that is what psychopaths are…and a teenager. Why do you keep pressing back into insanity rather than go towards a common sense approach?
This is getting a bit absurd.
Think about it, the more you rely on a general average to make judgements that means you’re giving less weight to the particulars of the case. We’re not talking about 3 year olds, we’re talking about a 17 year old, months away from being a legal adult.
Absurd that a 4 year old was tried for murder because the child was tried for murder…this type of insanity is what you are endorsing.