carl, I would think the prosecutor in this case will have field day. You try them separate, show motive,all other mountains of evidence in this case and finally the pictures of the children. With what the prosecution will have would you bet your life on one or two jurors. Granted there probably will be different sentences given depending on deals being cut to strengthen the case against the others, but it will will be offered to the least important defendant(s). Like you said it only takes one or two on the jury and on the other hand it only takes one or two witnesses willing to testify.

Ideally that is the way it should work but once it’s in front of a jury it’d only take one or two jurors to throw a monkey wrench into the process,and there is no way to tell how many charges each one would be convicted of.They all will not get the same no matter how much we would like to see it happen and if I were on the jury I’d tend to look harsher at the shooter or shooters.Not a perfect system but we have to work with what we got.

The law is crystal clear in this case.If your a participant of a felony, in this case robbery and a death results because of this robbery all parties become responsible for that death. That is why you saw the charges up-graded to murder on Gonzalez Sr. even though he was in the van waiting outside. Also, the prosecution will point out intent by the simple fact that weapons were taken to commit this crime and there were reasonable expectations that these weapons may be used. You cannot claim innocence or ignorance just because you were not the one that pulled the trigger. If the defense attorneys claim it was the 16 year old that did the killings and they were unaware that he was armed and did not know he was going to kill anyone, it still does not matter. You were still a part of the end result.

It all depends on how good a lawyer you can afford regardless if they have you on tape doing the crime.Crime is a money maker for a lot of people,and I’m not talking just about the ones doing the crime.It would be a good move by the others charged,to have this 16 year old,claim to have did the murders and they were just innocent bystanders doing a simple robbery.In fact they may have planned it that way in case they were caught.It wouldn’t hurt their case to try that defense,now or in their future appeals.I don’t think it could get any worse for them,so they’ll have that rabbit in the hat to try to pull out when needed.Makes you want to go back to the old style of justice doesn’t it?

the laws are so whacked. a fwe months ago there was a fourty year old getting youthful offender because he nad never been in trouble with the law.

“AGE AT WHICH ALL SUSPECTS ARE TRIED AS ADULTS
(The death penalty is forbidden in all states for those under the age of 18 at the time of their crime following the Supreme Court’s ruling in Roper v. Simmons (2005))” Notice I did not say i agreed with the law, but I wasn’t asked.

I agree with claycity. By the time he is tried and convicted (Should he be found guilty) he WILL BE 18. I stand by my first post, See Ya!!

remember how much trouble lionel tate, as well as those two boys who killed thier dad and are walking around now, were and are to us as a society. go ahead and fire up the chair, age is no deterrant.

He can’t receive the death penalty due the the fact that’s he’s under the age of 18, but they can try him as adult and make sure he never sees the light of day again.

LOL @ “Bees Da Man”. I know this isn’t a time for humor, but that’s funny turnip.