Assigning Culpability

On July 12, 2008, a group of high school students came into contact with Luis Ramirez, a 25 year-old illegal immigrant, in Pottsville, Virginia (see story here). The students and Ramirez shouted at each other, and after the students yelled racial slurs at Ramirez, a physical altercation ensued. Ramirez was outnumbered and suffered numerous blows to the head. After falling into a coma and spending two days in the hospital, Ramirez died from his injuries. The students who delivered the fatal blows were 17 and 19 years of age. On May 1, 2009, a jury acquitted both students of murder leaving simple assault as the only charges from the fatal incident in July. Subsequently, the case and its verdict have elicited varied reactions from across the nation. Many perceived the court’s verdict as just, because the students were boys at the time and should not be treated as harshly or as culpable as adults, whereas others wanted the culprits tried and convicted as adults.

More recently, a Pennsylvania 12-year old is being charged with murder (see story here) for killing his father's fiance. The adolescent was 11 years old at the time of the incident. While the court has not decided on how the adolescent will be tried, this case has yet again raised the issue of when humans should be help responsible for their actions.

The American Psychological Association has weighed in on both sides of this debate. In 2005, APA contributed to the Supreme Court Decision of Roper v. Simmons, which addressed adolescents and the death penalty. Given what is known about the development of the frontal lobe (i.e., our executive functioning, the part of our brain that helps with inhibition), it was concluded that the adolescent brain is developmentally immature. However, in the 1990 case Hodgson v Minnesota, APA concluded that adolescents are mature adults, enough so to seek an abortion without parental consent.

In my own mind, I have struggled with this dilemma. Trained as a sociologist and psychologist, I see the ubiquitous shades of gray in this issue. Socialization, human development, and individual responsibility are heterogeneous, nebulous arenas comprised of complex, bidirectional interactions with collective and individual entities. How then, can we create and enforce concrete, uniform legislation? More times than not, it seems that our conclusions in this issue are based on our biases, allegiances, proximity to the incident, or value systems, rather than a uniform metric by which everyone is judged. There is not an easy answer to this, but the ramifications are grand. Moreover, we should acknowledge the reality of this decision-making process.

The courts of Pennsylvania will be confronted with this decision shorty. Their assignment of culpability will have lasting ramifications on the 12-year old. And after this incident, we--as a society--will undoubtedly confront this issue in the future.