Slog News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

« Blue Cave | The Morning News »

Wednesday, December 19, 2007

Teen Locked Up Until the Year 2100

posted by on December 19 at 7:30 AM

Uh… I’m sure this 17 year-old kid is an absolutely irredeemable scumbag and all, but a 92 1/2 year sentence for a drive-by shooting in which no one was hurt seems a tad excessive, no? Perhaps even “cruel and unusual,” don’t you think?

RSS icon Comments

1

The kid must be black.

Posted by Cat in Chicago | December 19, 2007 7:58 AM
2

I think it fits the crime. I'm surprised he wasn't charged with six counts of attempted murder. What else is a drive-by shooting but attempted murder? I'm surprised you'd be upset by a tough penalty for such a crime Dan.

Posted by pragmatic | December 19, 2007 8:10 AM
3

I should also add to my previous comment: if he is indeed the shooter, since he's appealing the conviction.

Posted by pragmatic | December 19, 2007 8:12 AM
4

Cat beat me to it. Of course he's black. White kids are never involved with gun violence.

Kidding aside, any decent lawyer can get this overtunred on appeal...It's going to cost the kid a fortune, though...

Posted by Mike in MO | December 19, 2007 8:13 AM
5

perhaps he should have been a better shot. I dont think murders get sentences that long. Life in prison is usually ~25yrs.

Posted by mickey in AR | December 19, 2007 8:16 AM
6

Murderers

Posted by mickey | December 19, 2007 8:17 AM
7

That...what the hell? He isn't even 18.

The former Centralia High School student was convicted earlier this month of six counts of first-degree assault and two other charges.

Oh. Whatever. Fuck 'em.

Posted by Mr. Poe | December 19, 2007 8:22 AM
8

i heard a story yesterday about an 8th grader girl in florida who brought a steak knife to school to cut the piece of steak her mother packed in her lunch. as soon as she pulled the knife out of her lunchbox to eat the steak, the teachers detained her, she was arrested, suspended, and has to attend classes for people who "bring weapons to school."

gotta love the american justice system.

Posted by kim | December 19, 2007 8:22 AM
9

@8

That's hardly comparable, and parents should know by now, especially after Columbine, not to pack any meat knife in their childs lunchbox, regardless of how ridiculous the outcome may be.

Posted by Mr. Poe | December 19, 2007 8:24 AM
10

So, if 92.5 years is too long, what would be a more appropriate sentence? He shot at people (and shooting at people means you're trying to kill people), so I say lock him up for a long while. But, what would be more appropriate for you? 70 years? 60? 30? 10?

Assuming he really did it, it was his choice to make. As far as I can tell, no one put a gun in his hands and said, "Go shoot up a bar." So even if 92.5 years is too much, I have trouble sympathizing this morning.

Posted by James | December 19, 2007 8:32 AM
11

92 years does seem excessive. All he did was try to kill 6 people. It's not like he was trying trying to sell drugs or anything.

Posted by Mahtli69 | December 19, 2007 8:33 AM
12

@9 - Columbine was guns. Students going on a steak-knife stabbing rampage would be a refreshing change of pace from the current trend. The best part is, if they actually managed to kill anyone with a steak knife, they'd be too exhausted to continue. More steak knives in schools!

Posted by Mahtli69 | December 19, 2007 8:36 AM
13

The point is that murder would NOT get that long of a sentence. I believe firmly in long sentences for murderers but they rarely get more than 25 years so that is why this really got my attention. It was like, huh? Justice system needs to be consistent. I suppose the next shooter will be sure to kill them all so they don't get caught.

Posted by Touring | December 19, 2007 8:39 AM
14

@12

You obviously didn't go to school during Columbine. We weren't even allowed to bring action figures to school if they had fake plastic weapons, knife or gun, or bazooka. And for awhile plastic knives were banned as well. That's what I was referring to.

Posted by Mr. Poe | December 19, 2007 8:43 AM
15

@1

"17-year-old Guadalupe Solis-Diaz Jr"

Ummm, I'm going to to go out on a limb here and guess he isn't black. But he's not white so good enough! Throw the book at him!

Why haven't we heard from Al Sharpton? Oh wait, that's because he isn't black. That's not good enough. Throw the book at him!

Posted by GirlDuJourToday | December 19, 2007 8:45 AM
16

@14 - You're right, I'm too old for that. When I was in high school (graduated 1987), our band put this album out. Cover art was by a friend of ours who, when asked by a teacher what he would do if he knew he had only 24 hours to live, replied "I would kill all of my enemies". Nobody batted an eye (and he never harmed anyone).

I imagine both the comment and cover art would get him expelled or thrown in jail today.

Posted by Mahtli69 | December 19, 2007 8:52 AM
17

dude, i LOVE that album. haven't heard it in 18 years. can you put up a myspace page? i'd love to listen to it again. fuckin rock on! how do you make a satan's-horns emoticon anyway?

Posted by Sporting Fellow | December 19, 2007 8:58 AM
18

Too bad he wasn't drunk.
He would be walking around free.

Posted by observer | December 19, 2007 9:03 AM
19

@17 - You should love that album, because it was the shit.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
$$$$$___$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$___$$$$$$
$$$$_____$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$_____$$$$
$$$$_____$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$_____$$$$
$$$$_____$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$_____$$$$
$$$$_____$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$_____$$$$
$$$$_____$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$_____$$$$
$$$$_____$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$_____$$$$
$$$$_____$$____$$$____$$_____$$$$
$$$$_____$______$______$_____$$$$
$$$$_____$______$______$_____$$$$
$$$$_____$______$______$_____$$$$
$$$$_____$______$______$_____$$$$
$$$$_____$____$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
$$$$_____$___$$_____________$$$$$
$$$$_____$__$$_______________$$$$
$$$$______$$$_________________$$$
$$$$__________$$_______________$$
$$$$____________$$_____________$$
$$$$_____________$$___________$$$
$$$$______________$___________$$$
$$$$_______________$__________$$$
$$$$_______________$_________$$$$
$$$$$_______________________$$$$$
$$$$$$_____________________$$$$$$

Posted by Mahtli69 | December 19, 2007 9:06 AM
20

That pinky is fucking huge.

Posted by Mr. Poe | December 19, 2007 9:13 AM
21

@ 15: Looks like the spic is the nigger of the 2000s...

Posted by Mike in MO | December 19, 2007 9:14 AM
22

@16 - amazing!

@17 - \m/ works, too.

Posted by Levislade | December 19, 2007 9:15 AM
23

When is he eligible for parole?

Posted by Amelia | December 19, 2007 9:27 AM
24

Drive-bys should get a higher sentence than simple murders, because simple murders tend to be targeted at specific individuals. A drive-by not only creates the possibility of multiple deaths, but also very frequently results in the deaths of random individuals who were uninvolved in the original dispute, including children. That he was too lousy of a shot to hit anyone is good, but irrelevant to his guilt. I hope he lives out his sentence and gets gang-raped every day.

Posted by Christopher | December 19, 2007 9:35 AM
25

I'm finding it difficult to tap my vast wellsprings of sympathy and human kindness for this one this morning, Dan.

Posted by NapoleonXIV | December 19, 2007 9:46 AM
26

It was a premeditated attempt to end the life of multiple people. Many of them strangers. Some things never wash away. If he discovers compassion in prison, and completely transforms into a different man, he might deserve to be let out eventually. But the person that pulled the trigger needs to be kept out of society forever. It wasn't a youthful mistake. By any moral measure, it was a willfull act of pure evil. Let him think about that for awhile, say 90 or so years.

Posted by toasterhedgehog | December 19, 2007 10:08 AM
27

There is no parole in Washington (well, there's sort of parole for sex offenders). Those convicted of violent crimes will do 85% of their sentence if they earn good time credits. Those convicted of non-violent crimes will do 50% of their sentence.

Posted by Algernon | December 19, 2007 10:11 AM
28

I'm a little shocked by the harshness of the comments here, as 92 1/2 years seems WELL BEYOND reasonable and sane punishment (particularly as most of the logic seems to be of the: a crime has been committed, LOCK HIM UP FOREVER), but it does go a long way towards explaining why people are given these lengthy punishments: public support.

Posted by Me | December 19, 2007 10:29 AM
29

thank you @28. the kid was 17. who wasn't considerably more of an asshole at 17 than he/she is now, hmm? i'm not saying shooting a gun randomly at random people should just be dismissed as youthful hijinks, but i am saying that with some help and guidance in prison, this kid may be a decent person by the time he's 30 or so, once the hormones have calmed a bit and he's not quite so i'gnant. let's try reforming those who CAN be reformed (and not all can be, i'm not bleeding-heart ninny). a 92 year sentence is an assumption that this kid is garbage, not worth any effort, and there's no way to know that for sure at 17.

Posted by ellarosa | December 19, 2007 10:46 AM
30

the sentence isn't so bad. i would hope, however, that if by 30 he had reformed his ways, that he would then be eligible for parole. i'd rather the default be life in case he doesn't change.

and some who engage in youthful hijinks go on to greater, more destructive adult hijinks.

Posted by infrequent | December 19, 2007 1:07 PM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).