After reading the stories online about the thirteen year old from Lake Delton, Michael Crisafulli, who shot his father on Jan. 19, I was shocked to hear that this child can be tried as an adult in the Wisconsin court system.. According to an nbc15.com news release, anyone over 10 years old being charged with first-degree intentional homicide is automatically waived into adult court. That charge carries a mandatory life sentence. If he’s tried as a juvenile, he will still probably be in prison until after his 25th birthday.

Upon discussing this subject with friends, I discovered mixed feelings among them about whether or not he should be tried in adult court. It was pointed out that it is justifiable, because by the age of 10 a child will know that killing someone is wrong. But where is the motivation? Children may know that killing is wrong, but I do not think they can really understand why it is wrong. It goes to show that you never really know what may be happening in your neighbor’s home. A child would probably have many reasons for killing someone beyond anger, which was Crisafulli’s argument. After being expelled from school, his balloon of anger exploded—with a single gunshot into the back of his father’s head.

There are too many factors to consider when discussing the mental capabilities of a hormonal, prepubescent child. Emotions that are volatile in adolescents and teenagers can usually be controlled or mellowed with maturity. The automatic waiving of a child over 10 years old into adult court is not a reasonable policy. The defense for this action is that the juvenile’s lawyer can file a petition and get them moved into juvenile court, but can’t the reverse be said as well? From what I understand of the juvenile justice system, there are many more rehabilitative opportunities for a child put in a juvenile detention facility rather than someone put in a high-security adult prison. Of course, in the case of a first-degree intentional homicide, if a child is tried and convicted as an adult there would be no point to rehabilitation, because they will be in for life.

Anyone under the age of 18 should be given the benefit of at least starting their journey in the right age group. If, in the process of charging a minor and on a situational basis, it is determined that the minor was in control of the situation and should justifiably be tried as an adult, then they should be moved to adult court. The labor laws, custody laws and other aspects of the legal system in this country that protect children from being taken advantage of define an adult as 18 years of age. So why do we even have an age of majority if it does not apply to all situations? A minor does not have the rights of an adult: They cannot vote, get married, buy a house, live on their own, serve in the armed forces, buy lottery tickets and the younger ones cannot even drive a car. So how can a minor be considered an adult when the very justice system that will not allow them the rights of an adult will now consider them an adult at 10 years old in the case of a shooting?

Chelsea White
English Major