Boston Judge Sets Bail at $250,000 for 12-Year-Old Boy

Parent Cafe
1

<p>This is utterly ridiculous. A Boston judge set bail at $250,000 for a 12-year-old disabled boy who possessed a hand-gun. The attorneys asked for $5000. What message is this judge sending? That poor, disabled children are just as capable as being menace to society as criminals whose bails almost never reach that high on average? The boy’s mother, who just enrolled in nursing school, cannot even afford this bail! Hell, who can when most people don’t make that kind of income and the crime does not justify it? This is just a mockery of the judicial system. I am lost in what kind of message the judge and the mayor are sending to the deviant youth. It is biased and unethical. </p>

<hr>

<p>But to Judge Paul D. Lewis, the case was fresh evidence of a world gone mad. He set 50 times the bail, $250,000 cash, for the South End boy yesterday morning. </p>

<p>The boy’s lawyer said he was developmentally disabled and had a clean record. Even police and prosecutors were stunned by the amount. </p>

<p>It was a striking decision in an otherwise routine case that exposed the frustrations and complexities of managing persistent urban youth violence that confronts the courts and families in need every day. </p>

<p>''These kids don’t take responsibility for anything," Lewis, 64, said in an interview after the court hearing. ''They’re fearless. It’s out of control. It’s beyond out of control." </p>

<p>The boy, whose name was withheld by police because he is a juvenile, was taken into custody yesterday at a Department of Youth Services pretrial detention center. His mother, a nurse’s aide, could not come close to raising the high bail, the boy’s lawyer said yesterday. </p>

<p>''I was shocked," said the lawyer, Mariann Samaha, who plans to appeal the bail. ''God, he’s 12 years old. He has no judgment." </p>

<p>But Mayor Thomas M. Menino supported Lewis’s decision. </p>

<p>''You have to send messages that we’re not going to tolerate guns on the streets," Menino said, adding that he thought many youths believe they can elude the justice system. </p>

<p><a href=“http://www.boston.com/news/loc[/url]”>http://www.boston.com/news/loc&lt;/a&gt; al/massachusetts/articles/2005 /08/24/judge<em>sets</em>250000<em>bail</em> for<em>boy</em>12/</p>

2

<p>Gee - could it be that the judge and Menino are just sick and tired of all the shootings and killings by kids around that same age in Boston - and the kid got caught with a ‘‘gun’’ - maybe before he could kill another 12 yo??? Way way way toooo many innocent kids of that age - and much younger - in Boston - have met with early deaths - because of some stupid kid with a gun!!!</p>

3

<p>Wow… That’s interesting but sad at the same time. i understand where the judge is coming from here (and am actually glad to see that he’s being a hard <em>butt</em> about it), but the kid is disabled and most likely didn’t even know what he had especially since he had no crime record prior to the incident. (This kind of strikes a personal cord with me because I’m disabled. I’m not developmentally disabled obviously, but I know what it’s like to be considered an outsider due to a disability since I have a pretty big one still the same. It <em>plug in any swear word you want here.</em>) I agree that the kid should be punished somehow, but setting bail at $250,000? That’s a little high. At least make it low enough so that it can be matched, and give the kid counseling or community service. He needs help, but I don’t think a $250,000 bail is the type of help that he needs.</p>

4

<p>“some stupid kid with a gun”.</p>

<p>We don’t usually call developmentally disabled kids “stupid” anymore, do we?</p>

<p>And this will sure show the rest of’em. Yup, the special ed classes will be buzzing about being more careful with their guns, won’t they?</p>

<p>Bail is supposed to be about flight risk, not setting examples. There are trials and sentences for that.</p>

5

<p>Actually, it occurs to me that this might be an alternative to turning the kid over to children’s services. It’s obvious that the parent(s) are not providing adequate supervision, and the way most big cities’ offices for foster care are run these days, he may actually get better and more attention by staying put. Just a thought…</p>

6

<p>Just about a zillion assumptions there, and no research by the judge to prove any of them, as far as I have heard.</p>

7

<p>I agree that there needs to be more supervision. It sounds like this is a single mother attempting to attend school who may have difficulty finding supervision for her son.
Even kids who qualify for respite care services don’t always use those services, it is still expensive and there is a lifetime cap on amount received ( parents usually pay half) Govt cuts in health care especially for children have made many families who don’t have great ins. having to go without.
For example, a boy up the street, has spinal bifida, he requires a great deal of therapy every week. Luckily the parents have above average health coverage, but many famiiles do not, and the care available for lower income folks is often hard to wade through.</p>

8

<p>

Maybe all of you missed this part of the story? Since it is possible the boy is the one who fired the shot, he should stay in jail until trial. If it means requring $250,000 bond, so be it. And what would all of you have said about the judge if the Judge had let the boy out on $5000 bond and he got another gun and finished what he may have started?</p>

9

<p>its not a homicide case- its not an injury case- yes it “could” have been - but it isn’t.
It is the case of a boy shooting a gun up in the air on a street corner.</p>

10

<p>

With a bullet that could have landed in someone’s head or destroyed someone’s property. A 12 year old should have known better than to engage in such a dangerous act. The judge acted appropriately told jail the kid until a trial is held when more facts can be determined as to why the kid is shooting a gun.</p>

11

<p>““The boy, whose name was withheld because of his age, allegedly fired a .38-caliber handgun Monday evening on a street corner in the South End. Police officers heard the shot and saw the youth running off. He later approached the officers and handed them the loaded gun, wrapped in a bandanna, police said.”” Seattle Times</p>

<p>OKay, does that sound like a bad kid? He was with other kids who ran as well…and they kept going. no one saw him shoot the gun. he just gave it to the officers…</p>

12

<p>Um, we don’t hold people on bail for what they might do next; the assumption is that they haven’t been convicted of a crime yet; that’s what trials are for, right?</p>

<p>If guns are that easy to find for 12-year-olds, then he ain’t the only one who could fire them. But I’m sure his being locked up makes all of you feel safer, and that’s the point, really.</p>

13

<p>SInce he gave the gun to police that is what makes me feel safer, not 250,000 dollars bail</p>

<p>Something is missing and hopefully the truth will come out…police aren’t even saying he shot the gun…</p>