Undoubtedly, the implication of minors in serious criminal offenses, such as murder, often provokes controversy especially when the sentence is perceived by the public to be too harsh on the convicted minors. In Florida, for instance, the court’s ruling on fourteen-year-old Lionel Tate for killing his six-year-old playmate Tiffany Eunick, which found him guilty of first-degree murder, drew public criticism since it would hand down a mandatory life sentence for a minor.
Tate’s lifetime sentencing is further highlighted by the lighter sentences given to siblings Derek and Alex King who were charged with the murder of their father Terry King.In addition to murder, both Lionel Tate and the defendants in the King murder case can be charged for committing other crimes. Based on the data, Lionel Tate can be charged with battery for the physical injuries sustained by the victim Tiffany Eunick. The investigation on Eunick’s body shows that the girl suffered from internal damages due to Tate’s heavy blows on her body.
Tate’s statement corroborates the physical injury charge by his admission that he handled his playmate roughly by putting her in a headlock and banging her head on a table.In the King murder case, the brothers Derek and Alex King can be charged with arson and destruction of private property for setting their father’s house on fire in an attempt to cover up evidence to the crime. The two brothers themselves admitted setting the house on fire after Derek hit his father on the head with a baseball bat which caused Terry King’s immediate death. At the same time, the two boy’s alleged accomplice Ricky Marvin Chavis can be charged with sexual abuse and molestation of a minor for his alleged sexual and inappropriate involvement with Alex King.
However, the case facts also provide each of the defendants with an admissible defense for murder. For instance, Lionel Tate’s lawyer utilized the “infancy” defense to demonstrate that the accused did not know that his actions would lead to his playmate’s death. Another defense available to Lionel Tate is insanity. In this sense, the defense would have to prove that Lionel Tate was suffering from insanity at the time of the crime and therefore did not do that he was doing something wrong.In the same manner, the defendants in the King murder case could have used the “diminished capacity” defense to reduce their sentence from murder to manslaughter. In particular, Alex King could be argued to be suffering from emotional distress and confusion due to Ricky Marvin Chavis’ alleged sexual molestation of Alex.
In this sense, Alex King can be shown to have limited understanding of the crime he is accused of committing or to have had impaired judgement at the time of the commission of the criminal act.At the same time, Ricky Marvin Chavis’ alleged sexual abuse can be further used in the defense although it could be a weaker defense since the victim Terry King is not directly involved as a perpetrator of the abuse. Meanwhile, Lionel Tates’ punishment violates the “cruel and unusual” prohibition in the U. S. Constitution. For one, the Florida states’ mandatory life sentence for first degree murder convictions can be viewed as cruel since it leaves the judge or the jury unable to give due consideration for the individual circumstances of the defendant (Amendment 8, 2002, p.
1577).In this manner, a mandatory life sentence would also be arbitrary and irrational according to the Eight Amendment to the Constitution given Lionel Tate’s age at the time of the crime. Further, there is reason to believe that Lionel Tates’ first degree conviction and life sentencing is “unusual” in light of the King Brothers’ conviction with third degree murder and arson, and the maximum of eight years imprisonment handed down by the court. Consequently, Tates’ sentence may be overturned upon appeal with the court if the defense can substantially demonstrate that it violates the prohibitions on cruel and unusual punishments.
