Posted on 01/03/2009 2:28:23 PM PST by libh8er
Edited on 01/03/2009 2:34:05 PM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
SIERRA VISTA, Ariz.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
No, marajade, it isn’t the same county. Douglas is in Cochise County, on the Mexican Border. Springerville is up near Show Low and Eagar in Apache County. And as I think about it, it may have been St. Johns where it happened. Same area.
When our boys bit, they were bit in return.
When they hit, they were hit in return.
In my day, that wasn’t abuse.
Now, it is.
More detailed story from the local paper, the Sierra Vista Herald/Bisbee Daily Review:
BISBEE — The future of a 12-year-old Douglas boy found guilty of killing his mother is now in the hands of Judge James L. Conlogue.
As the pre-teen’s adjudication hearing ended Friday, Conlogue determined the prosecution proved the boy acted intentionally and with premeditation in the shooting death of his mother, Sara Madrid, 34, on Aug. 1 at their family’s home.
The judge will now decide how long the boy will spend in the juvenile detention system.
The Herald/Review has decided not to identify the boy because he is being charged as a juvenile, not an adult.
On the second day of an adjudication hearing, the prosecution rested its case with the testimony of Cochise County Sheriff’s Office Detective Wendy Adney, who was the initial interviewer in the boy’s case. During questioning by Deputy County Attorney Gregory Johnson, she said the boy’s rights were read to him from a special form used for juveniles and that he understood those rights.
Defense attorney Sanford Edleman wanted the judge to see the interview that had been videotaped, saying it would show the boy did not understand what was going on. He said the information given by the boy was not voluntary.
The DVD of the interview was played in the courtroom. In the video, the boy indicated to Adney several times that he understood the Miranda rights for juveniles and the charges that could be filed against him. He responded to Adney in a quiet voice at times and with his head held low.
When Adney asked him if he had thought about shooting his mom in the past, he replied, “Yes.”
After watching the video, Conlogue declared the boy’s rights had been thoroughly explained and ruled against the defense.
Adney testified that the boy said he shot his mother because of the things she had done to him. He gave a few incidents involving his mother’s temper that resulted in slapping and yelling. He believed his mother preferred his sister over him, since he was punished for things, but she was not. These were corroborated during the playing of the interview.
The argument that started earlier in that August day had to do with chores he was expected to complete. Madrid yelled at him for not doing a good enough job. Then she and Alfonso Munoz left for a while. Munoz was her partner for 10 years and a father figure for the boy.
When they were gone, the boy went into his mother’s bedroom and got a .22-caliber Ruger semi-automatic handgun that belonged to Munoz from the closet and loaded the 10-shot clip into the gun. Munoz had taught the boy how to use the gun.
The boy chambered a round, making the gun ready to fire, and walked outside with it in his pocket to wait for his mother and Munoz to return. When they arrived, he fired all the rounds in the gun at his mother.
Madrid was hit eight times with wounds to the heart, lung, abdomen, diaphragm and kidneys. The medical examiner declared she died of wounds from the shooting.
Two additional bullets were found in a swimming pool and matched to the gun.
From the interview that was taped, it appeared the boy did not know he actually killed his mother. At one point in the tape he asked Adney if Madrid was still in the hospital. Adney replied, “No.”
Two of the boys’ aunts were present during the interview and told the boy his mother was dead after Adney left the interview room. The detective gave them time to comfort the boy and then returned to finish the interview.
Edleman also argued it was not an act of pre-meditation or with the intent to kill just because the boy loaded a gun.
“I don’t believe the state has proven it an intentional act other than the multiple gunshots. In and of itself, that does not prove that the juvenile did this with intent to kill. He did intend to shoot his mother, just not cause her death. He wanted to take action against the abuse,” Edleman said.
Ernestine Huitron, who is Madrid’s sister, was called to the stand as a witness to the mother’s alleged abuse of the son, though she did not have frequent contact with her sister and nephew. She testified Madrid had a temper and yelled at the boy using offensive words and that Madrid did not want the boy to live with her.
“He is a docile, sweet boy,” Huitron said. “Sara said (the boy) was stupid and dumb.”
After closing arguments, Conlogue found the boy guilty of first-degree murder.
“The prosecution has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that (the boy) did commit first-degree murder,” the judge said.
After the hearing, Edleman said the judge could sentence the boy to juvenile corrections for a period of time or until he turns 18.
The disposition (sentencing) hearing of the juvenile will be held at 1 p.m. on Jan. 23.
Herald/Review reporter Shar Porier can be reached at 515-4692 or by e-mail at
“The judge will now decide how long the boy will spend in the juvenile detention system.”
Point of fact. If they come to the state dept of juvenile corrections, its up to them to determine the length of stay.
What a waste....
/johnny
Maybe not. At 18 he’s free and clear and the judge feels he can be rehabilitated.
I think you were right about the age. From the State Legislature pages:
13-501. Persons under eighteen years of age; felony charging; definitions
A. The county attorney shall bring a criminal prosecution against a juvenile in the same manner as an adult if the juvenile is fifteen, sixteen or seventeen years of age and is accused of any of the following offenses:
1. First degree murder in violation of section 13-1105.
Regardless of anything else said on this thread, those three words will stand out. In any case of a child killing a parent that sentiment holds true.
That juvenile law was all a former Gov Symington thing. So since the kid was 12 the judge was pretty limited.
We are responsible for our own lives.
Your post gave me a little bit of logic cognitive dissonance. Which is it? Govt control or self control?
/johnny
hopefully he can be rehabilitated like the judge ruled
Yeah, we wouldn't want to ruin his reputation.
Yelling is not abuse. Slapping/ spanking is not abuse. Even cracking the belt now and then is not abuse. What IS abuse is what children are exposed to during school hours.
I don’t care what your own personal opinion of what abuse it. There are legal definitions of what abuse is and the judge ruled there was by the parent in this case.
You can’t just violate confidentiality laws.
Understood, however, the law is an ass.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.