The law is the law, but what's your opinion in the outcome of this case?

If he comitted a “typical” robbery with a real weapon, making threats etc. It seems fitting, I think.

In my opinion, the key element is armed robbery, not 7 cents. The presence of a deadly weapon changes everything, wherever it is.

Yea it’s the motive and intention, as fellow jellows said, and not the amount stolen. The law punishes acts based on elements of the crime and not whether the crime was fruitful for the criminal or not.

I agree with you that it is the intent.

Like @josie said…armed robbery is a felony and should be prosecuted as such.

Guilty as charged. It was the method and intent.
If it was for zero cents, it would not matter.
There is no “foul” here. If someone went to rob a bank and got no money and fled, they still are prosecuted for the robbery.
Armed robbery involving use of a weapon and aggravated robbery involving use of a deadly weapon are charged irregardless of what was taken or not taken.

I suspect we will see this on “World’s Dumbest Criminals” soon.

The conviction was for armed robbery, not for theft. It doesn’t matter if he didn’t get away with anything at all. He still committed armed robbery and was convicted of that crime.

According to this article about the case, the weapons were actually bb guns, but of course the purpose of having them, even if they are not real guns, was to intimidate the victim. The article also notes that the boys involved kicked and punched the victim, and I am sure this was considered in the sentencing.

FYI, the other boy involved pleaded guilty, was sentenced to four years, and will not have a criminal record. The boy you are referring to denied any involvement even though he was clearly identified by the victim and his accomplice confessed. According to this article, that played into the sentencing decision as well.

IMO if this kid made the choice to commit the crime using a weapon, he made the choice to deal with the consequences, but it seems there is more at play here than just his use of a weapon.

Just because the perpetrator didn’t pick a victim with more money isn’t the issue. He committed armed robbery. The law is supposed to protect the poor folks too.

I suspect there is really only one person crying “foul”: the 15-year-old.

I question the length of the sentence, particularly if this was a first offence (information unknown to me). I hope a thorough assessment of his case was done before transferring this child to adult court.

I know they want to implement the law and make some people as examples but common. 7 cents and he gets 8 years? What about those who steal a lot more and because it’s the first time they do a crazy thing or because they have a good lawyer they get away with less than 2 years.

Even if the they didn’t want to plead guilty at first and the second boy decided to take his chances this is not a reason to give such a harsh sentence. While doing so they encourage him to keep on that track and get “even” with society later. What the hell? After 16 or 18 his sentence will be commuted from juvenile to normal prison. What then?

I know nothing of the case or the individual – except for the research that @SuperMouse provided. (Thanks)
7 cents is not the point at all. If the victim had $ 100 or $1000 would that have a had any bearing on the case. I don’t think so. The BB gun makes no difference either. He pointed a weapon at a person for the purpose of intimidation. If the victim had been armed and returned fire with a well placed round to the head there would be an outcry too.
This kid is dangerous but for 4 years he will not be walking around picking on others. He will be worse when he comes out but he will be watched. .

From the paper: “the evidence showed the two youths ran up from behind a 73-year-old man on his way to a neighborhood store Dec. 22 and knocked the victim into a snowbank.
While the victim was on the ground, Ninham kicked him in the head and Stewart punched him in the face, breaking his glasses, the judge said.
The victim testified the youths were both armed with guns, one appeared to be a revolver and the other a shotgun, the judge said. Stewart claimed in a confession that the weapons were BB guns.
Although Stewart gave police a confession implicating himself in the robbery,...”

If guns weren’t so readily available this might not have happened. I understand the severity of the sentence but if he is only 15 now what chance has he got when he gets out?

@flutherother – Don’t be ridiculous. If guns were more readily available these little sh!ts would not be mugging 73 year old men for fear that the geezer might (rightfully) plug their sorry behinds.

Not that it changes the fact that the case is about teens engaged in an armed mugging an old man, but these are BB guns we are talking about here, not .50 cal desert eagles

I think they’re charging him for the armed robbery, and not the seven cents. Plenty of people who attempt a robbery, fail, and get nothing still get a sentence. I say it’s applicable. Eight years is a bit hardcore for a 15 year old though…

Whatever he gets, he deserves.
This shows the issue that people are thinking we should not be responsible for our actions.
People like to look for any excuse they can find to not answer the responsibility of actions and their subsequent consequences.

My thought is he got that long sentence because it it far from his first offence.

It was a premeditated beating? That takes planning even if it’s not a lot of planning. They have it down pretty well even without the fake guns. They are going to do this again when they get the chance. I wish the victim would have been armed, he would have saved someone a lot of heartache down the road. Alas this is New York where the criminals get to have guns and the honest people obey the law and stay vulnerable, perfect.

I think 8 years is too long for a 15 year old. If the system was better, it might prove beneficial but I think the revolving door aspect of the justice system may end up doing more harm than good.
What I find frustrating is that there’s people committing rape, child abuse and a myriad of other heinous crimes in this country and they get less time than that. I don’t see the logic. Of course I’m referring to my own country. I’m not too knowledgeable about the American justice system.

If you’re going to steal, then steal big. Punishment is inversely proportionate to the value stolen. Rob a liquor store for $50, you’re going to prison for many years. Steal a few $million via questionable trading practices and you’re getting a promotion.

I agree with others above – maybe it’s just me, but I think the truly heinous part of an armed robbery is not the money stolen, but the threat – the fear you’ve induced in innocent people while achieving your end. It would be a traumatic experience for most people involved, and that’s worth punishment, not the theft of 7 cents.

If you have never had a real gun shoved in your face you can’t imagine the terror that paralyzes. It happened to me one time, and I’ve never been the same since. You don’t forget things like that ever because you will be psychologically wounded forever. Those two idiots have done damage they will never fully appreciate. Eight years isn’t near enough for what they did to that guy.

@tom_g “I suspect there is really only one person crying “foul”: the 15-year-old”.

Your wrong Tom, there are leftist liberals out there who actually feel sorry for murders on death row.. Never having experienced a personal assault, they look for the hate in justice to overcome their own logic. The only draw back in my opinion of giving this kid eight years is that we are in essence creating another killer felon who in a little over eight years will be back knocking on those bars for yet a few more years of free room and board.

@chewhorse: ”Your wrong Tom, there are leftist liberals out there….”

That’s exactly what I was getting at. I’m about as “leftist” and “liberal” as they come, am against the death penalty (for practical reasons), live in what is often referred to as one of the most “liberal” states, etc., yet I know of not a single person who would have any problem with this.

We have conservative talk radio here that makes a habit of creating the evil liberal strawman who is supposedly out there holding all kinds of unreasonable positions. They devote their entire radio shows arguing against the “liberals” and “leftists” who want to “let all of the criminals out of prison, give them welfare, and let them rape your daughter”. It’s fabrication, and it’s propaganda, and it’s designed to allow people to throw terms like “leftist liberals” around without actually knowing what they mean.