Bully for Him!!

[Joe Guy]

Yes it was, from the OP;

Fifteen-year-old Jorge Saavedra was facing a second-degree murder charge ...

I'm no lawyer but I know that second degree murder is not premeditated murder.

[loCAtek]

Well, I've found this much from a cousin of Dylan's on Facebook;

Briana Nuno- You need to under stand stabbing some 12 times isn't self defense a little stab to the arm would have been fine . You guys have no clue what happen he didn't get bullied he got mad cause his ex girlfriend went to Dylan which is the boy who got killed . That kid had raged , he showed the knife too 2 girls before he knew he was going to fight , that's why he brought it , if you knew the facts , went to the courts and saw everything you would understand this kid deserves to be in jail for a very long time . My cousin deserves to be here he wasn't a bad guy . Boys are boys nowadays everyone in high school ta

http://www.facebook.com/HLN/posts/295887283790679

[Joe Guy]

Something written on facebook by an alleged cousin of the bully doesn't amount to anything. I'm sure he is more than a little biased. If he and others knew what the writer alleges about the kid planning to kill the bully, why didn't it come out in court?

[BoSoxGal]

Okay, LJ & loCA, you are absolutely correct in all your assertions here, whether based in actual evidence or pulled out of your asses covered in santorum.

You win. Finis.

[loCAtek]

Something written on facebook by an alleged cousin of the bully doesn't amount to anything. I'm sure he is more than a little biased. If he and others knew what the writer alleges about the kid planning to kill the bully, why didn't it come out in court?

This wasn't a trial, but a hearing to determine if his case would go to court. What we have from the OP is that for only two days, only the witnessness at the scene were interviewed. That means motive was never investigated.
I'm tempted to contact that cousin, and ask for more details.

[Joe Guy]

This wasn't a trial, but a hearing to determine if his case would go to court. What we have from the OP is that for only two days, only the witnessness at the scene were interviewed. That means motive was never investigated.

It looks to me as though motive was the basis of the judge's decision. That's why it was first a 2nd degree murder charge and then determined to meet Florida's 'Stand Your Ground' law.

[loCAtek]

His cousin is correct;

Brodie heard from 15 students who were on the bus that January afternoon, as well as one girl who was identified by the prosecution as having first dated Nuno, then Saavedra briefly. She was not on the bus the day of the stabbing.

...

Saavedra had a pocket knife, he admitted in court. He showed it to two teens sitting near him on the bus. Nuno was unarmed.

...

But neither Saavedra nor Nuno wanted to fight, each boy told at least one person, witnesses said. Nuno was explicit about avoiding the conflict, a senior testified.

“He said it clearly in the back of the bus that he didn’t want to fight,” the senior said.

From this account, It appears that both boys were goaded by the crowd into fighting. Dylan Nuno was not the sole bully, but was singled out because of the love-triangle.

Details have emerged about how the fight was planned, with teens shuttling messages back and forth from the back of the bus where Nuno sat to the front where Saavedra was.

There is also some testimonythat the judge had thrown out, which is what the cousin said amounted to a confession.

[Joe Guy]

The original article said that there would be no appeal of the judge's decision.

My guess is that the lawyers involved know more about the case than all of these people who are writing about it online.

[Lord Jim]

The original article said that there would be no appeal of the judge's decision.

It said there would be no appeal because the the judge gave the killer immunity.

Funny how nobody writing online who witnessed this event or knew anything about these two first hand is saying anything that would tend to justify the judge's decision. Looks to me like the judge chose to ignore most of what the witnesses said in order to pursue a pre-determined course.

Everything I've seen makes it look more and more like the judge was on a crusade.

If he and others knew what the writer alleges about the kid planning to kill the bully, why didn't it come out in court?

Personally I don't believe the killer planned in advance to kill the kid, but how is it you know what did and did not come out in court Joe? Do you have a transcript?

I have to say that I'm kind of amused at what looks to me like an almost religious faith that you seem to be investing in the wisdom and fairness of the judge, and your willingness, despite almost no public proof supporting her, to accept her words as Gospel....

I seem to recall that in the OJ Simpson case in Las Vegas, you were not so inclined....

[Lord Jim]

BTW this link that LoCa provided:

http://www.naplesnews.com/news/2011/dec ... hreatened/

Gives by far the most detailed account of the evidence presented that we have seen here, and further calls into question the conclusions of the judge.

I guess there must be some conspiracy on the part of the Florida news media to try to prevent all the strong evidence supporting her decision from getting out to the public....

[Joe Guy]

If he and others knew what the writer alleges about the kid planning to kill the bully, why didn't it come out in court?

Personally I don't believe the killer planned in advance to kill the kid, but how is it you know what did and did not come out in court Joe? Do you have a transcript?

I made the assumption that if premeditation had been brought up in court, it would have been reported on.

I have to say that I'm kind of amused at what looks to me like an almost religious faith that you seem to be investing in the wisdom and fairness of the judge, and your willingness, despite almost no public proof supporting her, to accept her words as Gospel....

I seem to recall that in the OJ Simpson case in Las Vegas, you were not so inclined....

My opinion of the OJ / Las Vegas case was that OJ's overly harsh sentence was not based on the facts of the current case and was rather heavily influenced by the fact (in my opinion) that he was acquitted for a murder he had committed years earlier.

In this case there is so much lack of evidence available to us that I am inclined to accept the judge's decision. This is based partially on my own experience.

Have you ever had a physical fight with someone who had taunted and threatened to kill you over a period of time?

I have.

And he stopped bothering me after a while.

Fortunately for him (and me) he didn't die - and he stopped what he was doing and I never saw him much again.

I think he just realized that he had made a bad mistake.

[Lord Jim]

someone who had taunted and threatened to kill

I'm sorry, I missed the part where the kid who was killed threatened to kill the killer. Do you have a link to that?

Joe I see a huge contradiction in these two statements in your latest post:

I made the assumption that if premeditation had been brought up in court, it would have been reported on.

In this case there is so much lack of evidence available to us that I am inclined to accept the judge's decision.

On the one hand, you're saying that you assume everything that would be important would be reported, and then on the other you're saying, (correctly in my view) that the reporting has left "much lack of evidence"...

I really don't see how both can be true...

This is based partially on my own experience.

Have you ever had a physical fight with someone who had taunted and threatened to kill you over a period of time?

I have.

And he stopped bothering me after a while.

Fortunately for him (and me) he didn't die - and he stopped what he was doing and I never saw him much again.

I think he just realized that he had made a bad mistake.

Joe, I sympathize with you for the traumatic personal experience you endured, and I'm very glad for you that it ended without serious tragedy.

However, with all due respect, (and I think you know that I do respect you) it seems to me that you are taking this personal experience from your life and projecting it on to this case, and that it is this projection, rather than any known facts about this particular case, that is completely informing your judgement about it. (since the known facts would seem to argue for skepticism about the judge's decision)

This case is not a replay of something that happened to you; it is a completely different and unique case with it's own set of dynamics and facts.

Just because something happened in your case doesn't mean it happened in this one.

[loCAtek]

As I feared, you should see the backlash of homicide cases, claiming 'self-defense' in that county now.

[Joe Guy]

someone who had taunted and threatened to kill

I'm sorry, I missed the part where the kid who was killed threatened to kill the killer. Do you have a link to that?

I didn't say that happened in this case. But I do believe the 14 yr old may have felt that his life was threatened.

Joe I see a huge contradiction in these two statements in your latest post:

I made the assumption that if premeditation had been brought up in court, it would have been reported on.

In this case there is so much lack of evidence available to us that I am inclined to accept the judge's decision.

I don't see the contradiction. I spoke of the lack of evidence available to us, not the judge.

On the one hand, you're saying that you assume everything that would be important would be reported, and then on the other you're saying, (correctly in my view) that the reporting has left "much lack of evidence"...

Sorry for being unclear. I'm talking about reported to the court as opposed to what we have read reported online and other places.

Joe, I sympathize with you for the traumatic personal experience you endured, and I'm very glad for you that it ended without serious tragedy.

However, with all due respect, (and I think you know that I do respect you) it seems to me that you are taking this personal experience from your life and projecting it on to this case, and that it is this projection, rather than any known facts about this particular case, that is completely informing your judgement about it. (since the known facts would seem to argue for skepticism about the judge's decision)

This case is not a replay of something that happened to you; it is a completely different and unique case with it's own set of dynamics and facts.

Just because something happened in your case doesn't mean it happened in this one.

You're correct that what happened to me may not be true in this case. But it seems likely that something very similar happened. If not for my (or anyone's) personal experience, what else have we to draw upon when attempting to understand the mindset of someone who kills someone who taunted or bullied him?

My opinion is based on my life's experience and observations. Your opinion must be based on the same kind of reasoning.

Who is right?

Maybe we'll never know the complete truth about this one incident, but some of us will have an understanding of what does lead to this type of result in many circumstances.

[Lord Jim]

I'd like to make a little digression observation here about this thread:

I think it should it be noted that while there are obviously some strong feelings involved here, and there have been a few sharp exchanges, the discourse in this thread has overall remained very civil and stayed on topic.

It's nice to know that is still possible. It seems that has become something of a rarity.

[loCAtek]

Does this mean you'll come sing karaoke at Joe Guy's wing-ding? .



...I think I'll bring along my infamous Seven-Layer Fiesta Dip! ...for when we get the munchies.

[Joe Guy]

Does this mean you'll come sing karaoke at Joe Guy's wing-ding? .

I seem to recall that LJ once said that he has a deep voice.

Maybe he would could do a karaoke song by Isaac Hayes.

"Shaft!"

'Who's the black private dick
That's a sex machine to all the chicks?
(Shaft!)
You're damn right'

Maybe not...

Seems a bit out of character.

He should do something about Ronnie Reagan.

Hmmmmm....

Who's the big white President
That was older than everyone he met
(Ronnie!)
You're damn right

Oh well...

Might need a little work, but after a few of Dales' joints we'll all be in the zone!!

[Jarlaxle]

For the kid to get off scot-free sends a terrible message.

Only to bullies

Oh please...

I'm not certainly not going to defend bullying, but I don't believe it's a Death Penalty offense...

You honestly don't think sending the message that if you're being picked on, it's perfectly acceptable to deliberately kill the person picking on you is a bad message to send?

The contrary...I would say it sends EXACTLY the right message: push someone, even someone generally not violent, too far and the consequences can be dire. I would say the human race would be greatly improved if a few dozen more bullies wound up with their innards spilling onto the sidewalk.

[loCAtek]

Don't be such a buzzkill, Jarl

[Jarlaxle]

Bullies understand one thing: force. They understand swift, brutal, overwhelming FORCE. The best way to deal with a bully is to put him in the hospital...he'll usually never bother you again.