Twenty one years is a long time for a 17 year old kid, and hopefully while in prison he will change his ways, come to a better understanding of others and not be the cold blooded killer that he was when he was 14.
It’s a complicated case. For instance, it isn’t clear that the victim was really gay. He was a small kid who learned that acting gay made him a member of a protected class. It also gave him a weapon with which to bully the bigger kids and a lot of the evidence says that that is exactly what he did.
The prosecution tried to paint the killer as a gay hating Nazi because he had a fascination with World War II stuff on the history channel. The evidence suggests that he was more a victim of the “gay” kids bullying.
Obviously, the kid way overreacted. I’m not arguing that he should walk free. The question has been what is the appropriate sentence. I think second degree is about as good as anything.
Here is a good article on the case from before the trial...
http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2008/07/18/young-gay-and-murdered.html
So the adults at the school entrapped normal boys with a flaming homosexual harasser and refused to “tone down” the pervert’s behavior in respect of other male students even when they knew the flamer was being sexually aggressive.
Men should not have to tolerate being sexually harassed by mentally ill flaming perverts and their reaction of violence (verbal or physical) towards homosexual harassers is a normal response. Sexual harassment is sexual dominance.
Liberals want to train men to submit to homosexual dominance starting as boys. The adults turned that school into a jail with boy inmates to serve as sex objects for the pervert community. One boy was not playing the game of sex victim. It is the adults who sexually abused the boys who should be going to jail.