‘It’s disgusting’: Outburst in court as child acquitted of teen’s murder

‘It’s disgusting’: Outburst in court as child acquitted of teen’s murder

The Tragic Incident

In a shocking turn of events, a 13-year-old boy was accused of being part of a group that brutally attacked and killed a 16-year-old teenager, Declan Cutler. The incident occurred in March last year as Declan was leaving a birthday party. The teenager was stabbed and kicked, enduring over 100 wounds and ultimately succumbing to four fatal stab wounds.

The Youngest Accused

The youngest among the group of eight boys was charged with murder and manslaughter for his role in the attack. Now aged 14, he faced a judge-only trial. The boy’s lawyer utilized the Doli Incapax argument, asserting that the boy was too young to comprehend the moral implications of his actions. Therefore, according to this argument, he was too young to be held criminally responsible.

The Doli Incapax Argument

The Doli Incapax is a Latin term that translates to ‘incapable of evil.’ It is a legal doctrine originating from English law, which presumes that a child cannot form the mens rea, or criminal intent, due to their age. This presumption can be rebutted by the prosecution if they can demonstrate beyond a reasonable doubt that the child knew that their actions were seriously wrong at the time of the offense.

The Verdict

Justice Rita Incerti of the Victorian Supreme Court ruled that there was a “reasonable possibility” that the boy did not comprehend his actions were “seriously wrong in a moral sense” at the time of the attack. As a result, she stated that the boy cannot be found guilty of murder or manslaughter. The ruling was met with cries and screams of disgust from Declan’s supporters in the public gallery.

Public Outrage

The verdict was met with immense public outrage, particularly from supporters of the deceased teenager. They expressed their disgust and disappointment at the verdict loudly in the public gallery of the courtroom. The decision sparked a debate about the age of criminal responsibility and the effectiveness of the Doli Incapax doctrine in such cases.

Age of Criminal Responsibility

The age of criminal responsibility differs from one jurisdiction to another. In some regions, a child as young as seven can be held criminally responsible. In contrast, others believe that a child must be at least 14 or 15 to fully understand the consequences of their actions. The case of the 13-year-old boy charged with murder raises questions about whether the current age of criminal responsibility is appropriate.

Conclusion

The case of the 13-year-old boy charged with murder is a stark reminder of the difficult ethical and legal questions that arise when children are accused of serious crimes. It forces society to confront the delicate balance between the need for justice and the recognition of a child’s capacity for understanding the consequences of their actions.