12 year saves mother by killing her attacker

[KenpoTex]

This kid is a hero, he saw his mother being attacked and acted decisively to end the threat. Stories like this make me feel all warm and fuzzy.
Any prosecutor that would file charges in a case like this needs to be monkey-stomped.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/20...008040101090_pf.html

Md. Boy, 12, Kills Man Attacking Mother
Officials Undecided On Filing Charges

By Avis Thomas-Lester and Hamil R. Harris
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, April 2, 2008; A01



The 12-year-old boy had finished his homework and was playing a video game when he heard his mother cry out. Rushing to her aid, he found her on the kitchen floor, straddled by a fellow resident of their Prince George's County boarding house, the man's hands wrapped tightly around her neck, the boy said yesterday.

"I kept saying, 'Stop! Stop! Stop!' " the boy said, describing the events of Monday night. "But he just ignored me. He didn't stop. He just kept hurting her."

The boy said he grabbed a knife and swung, slashing 64-year-old Salomon Noubissie across the neck and opening an artery. Noubissie was fatally wounded.

The mother, Cheryl Stamp, said she did not immediately understand what had happened. "What did you do?" she said she asked her son.

"He didn't say anything," she said. "But I knew when I looked in his eyes. I said, 'Oh, Lord.' "

Law enforcement officials were reviewing evidence yesterday and had not decided whether to file charges. Their preliminary account of the incident broadly matches that of the boy and his mother.

The case presents exceedingly unusual circumstances: Rarely is a 12-year-old implicated in a homicide, and even less often does a child that age take a life to protect his mother.

Please click the above link for the whole article!

 

[Sukerkin]

A story that is quite tragic at it's heart, for all the individuals involved .

It makes you wonder what got into that somewhat elderly man (either psychologically or chemically) to make him behave so?

 

[terryl965]

The boy did what anyone should have done, that is do whatever it takes to safe a mother Life.

 

[MA-Caver]

"I knew I had to kill him so he would stop hurting my mother," he said.

My thought on this is yes indeed perhaps to his mind that was the only alternative... still part of me wishes he hadn't said it. That way if any charges were pressed they'd be accidental homicide. He acted with intent... and rightly so I'll agree but voicing that intent is what makes a difference in court. Saying something to the effect of "I had to do something to stop him... I was scared and he wouldn't listen to me and I was afraid he would go after me next..." This would protect him more in court than the above statement.

I agree it is tragic. A child that young shouldn't have to be subject to killing someone... even in defense. Of course he most likely didn't mean to kill him. Slashing open an artery was a lucky swipe of the knife.

I'm just looking at what probably the prosecutor will be looking at. It's their job and it's the kids' defense attorney that's suppose to show otherwise. Likely the jury (again, if charges are pressed) will hear the story and decide the kid did what he had to do.

 

[exile]

The prime imperative: protect those who protect you. A child is mostly completely dependent on his or her mother; a threat to the mother's life is in the same instant a threat to your own. I suspect we're to some extent hard-wired for this. Hundreds of millions of years of survival testing will pretty much have drummed that much into our neuroanatomy, you/'d figure.

I agree with kenpotex: I can see no valid basis for pressing charges. MA-C is right: it might have been better if he hadn't said what he said. But all that that statement could show was lethal intent, and the use of the knife itself is probably good enough evidence for that, so it's not clear how much worse what the child said could make the situation. And I think a clever defense attorney could take a lot of the sting out of the statement. The important point at issue is, is it justified for a child to respond with deadly force to a deadly threat to the parent he's absolutely dependent on? I think any even half-competent defense attorney could make that case persuasively enough for a judge or jury to decide that the 3rd-person defense provision would kick in.

And really, what would we want the child to have done in this horrible situation? He had only milliseconds to decide, possibly, between his mother's life and that of a virtual stranger. As I say, his reaction was the one that corresponds to the difference between lineages surviving vs. dying out....

 

[grydth]

I trust most media accounts as far as I could throw the press that printed them....

Just for the sake of debate, presuming the account to be accurate - - - it is a sad sign of the times that the government would deliberate over 4 seconds on charging this brave young man with a felony. Once upon a time, the decision over letting a nut murder mom on the kitchen floor or defending your family would've been a no brainer, the young man hailed as a hero by the police and the community rallying around the family.

What a sheeple society this is becoming.

 

[Sukerkin]

I in general feel in accord with the statements above. In similar circumstances, I too would've used whatever means necessary to stop the attack on my mother.

I would just caution against over-playing the 'child' aspect tho'. That supposed child massed more than I did for most of my adult life (I was about 150lb right up to the time I settled down with my missus a handful of years ago).

 

[Ninjamom]

I would just caution against over-playing the 'child' aspect tho'. That supposed child massed more than I did for most of my adult life.

Yes, I caught that, too. The 12-yr-old 'child' has several inches and 20 to 25 pounds on me.

IF everything proceeded as the child and Mom say, then I agree that there is no reason to press charges. However, I believe the police have a responsibility to investigate, to see if that is in fact what happened.

 

[tellner]

I'm sorry he had to kill the guy.
I'm glad that he was able to do what was necessary.

The police always say they're still investigating, and the DA always says he's considering charges.

I remember two cases from years back. In one a blind-from-birth guy was mugged. He took the mugger down, let him up when the guy promised to behave and threw him on his head with fatal skull-fracture goodness when the guy threatened to shoot him. The DA spent a day or two "considering" and finally decided not to seek an indictment.

In the other a burglar broke into the house and was strangling/raping Mom. Teenage daughter stabbed him puncturing the aorta. Spurt. Gurgle. Thump. Again the DA thoughtfully weighed his options and finally decided that charges were not warranted.

I really doubt that a True Bill would have been returned in either case. If one had I can't imagine a long trial much less a conviction. And I don't think one will be here. They have to at least appear to be taking the matter seriously.

 

[tellner]

My thought on this is yes indeed perhaps to his mind that was the only alternative... still part of me wishes he hadn't said it. That way if any charges were pressed they'd be accidental homicide. He acted with intent... and rightly so I'll agree but voicing that intent is what makes a difference in court. Saying something to the effect of "I had to do something to stop him... I was scared and he wouldn't listen to me and I was afraid he would go after me next..." This would protect him more in court than the above statement.

He didn't do anything wrong. If he'd said it was an accident there would have been an issue of negligent homicide. Or a prosecutor could have said "He acted in a blind panic." Neither would be good for him.

He knew what he was doing.
He knew why he was doing it.
The first thing he tried to do was avoid the use of force by talking.
That didn't work.
He was in reasonable fear of death or serious bodily harm to an innocent.
The danger was immediate.
He had exhausted all other reasonable options.
The deceased was behaving in a violent and irrational manner.

The only real mistake he made was talking to the Press.
Never EVER talk to the Press about a self defense case until the trial is over and you can be sure there will not be lawsuits.

Other than that it's nearly a textbook example of "The Judicious Use of Deadly Force".

 

[MA-Caver]

He didn't do anything wrong. If he'd said it was an accident there would have been an issue of negligent homicide. Or a prosecutor could have said "He acted in a blind panic." Neither would be good for him.

He knew what he was doing.
He knew why he was doing it.
The first thing he tried to do was avoid the use of force by talking.
That didn't work.
He was in reasonable fear of death or serious bodily harm to an innocent.
The danger was immediate.
He had exhausted all other reasonable options.
The deceased was behaving in a violent and irrational manner.

The only real mistake he made was talking to the Press.
Never EVER talk to the Press about a self defense case until the trial is over and you can be sure there will not be lawsuits.

Other than that it's nearly a textbook example of "The Judicious Use of Deadly Force".

I didn't say he did anything wrong. But it is after all their word against the dead guy's. Hopefully the police will investigate throughly and come to the hopeful conclusion that we are all wanting... that it was a defense situation and the boy should be viewed as a hero.
But you're right... if the press comes to you before the trial (if any) the only two words you need to do is taken from the politicians... no comment.

 

[Jade Tigress]

The kid did the right thing. In spite of his words, I'm sure the reality of it is he acted on instinct. There wasn't time to "premeditate". He first shouted for the man to stop, when the attacker didn't, he went to step two, which probably all happened in less than 60 seconds.

The fortunate thing is the man was "combative with officers even as he was heavily bleeding" which shows the state of attack he was in. Can you imagine what he was like without the officers and no wound? Crazy right?

 

[BrandiJo]

im 5'5 and 160, and im 21 ... This kid acted in self defense i have every belief that no charges will be filed, however given the currant state of things, i wish him well and pray that he does not open his mouth to the media again.

 

[Kacey]

The boy did the right thing in a difficult situation. There were other "right" things he could have done (called the police, hit the man over the head with a chair, etc.) that would have been less likely to be fatal - however, his size notwithstanding, he is a child - and under the circumstances, he did very well in a very difficult situation. Unfortunately, whether legal charges are filed or not, he will have to live with the consequences of his actions - and legal issues aside, taking a life, no matter the reason, is a very serious act; doing so in such a person, up-close fashion will only exacerbate the difficulties this boy will (hopefully) have in dealing with this issue. I hope, for his sake, that his mother seeks counseling to help him deal with the emotional fallout he will (hopefully) feel in the future.

 

[Hawke]

Assuming the description of events are accurate I doubt any jury/judge will find him guilty.

Hopefully no one will seek revenge (physical or legal).

The kid had to make a fast decision under extreme stressful conditions.

If anyone attacked someone I deeply care about like that, I would do whatever is necessary to protect her life in self defense.

Can you imagine if some stranger attacked your mom?

 

[tellner]

Counseling may or may not help. Very often when people are clear about why they did what they did and believe that it was the right thing to do counseling muddies and confuses. There's also an excellent chance that any but the best sort of counselor will project onto the boy how he feels the kid should feel. That said it should be available if his mother thinks it is called for.

He will certainly undergo some changes at the hands of his peers. Many people have a prurient/puritanical view of violence, especially deadly violence. It will come out in how they relate to him. Kids who don't have well-integrated values may react even more poorly than adults.

I just hope that there are enough people he looks up to - adults and peers - who will let him know that he did the right thing and that they respect him for it. That will help more than anything.

 

[MA-Caver]

Counseling may or may not help. Very often when people are clear about why they did what they did and believe that it was the right thing to do counseling muddies and confuses. There's also an excellent chance that any but the best sort of counselor will project onto the boy how he feels the kid should feel. That said it should be available if his mother thinks it is called for.

He will certainly undergo some changes at the hands of his peers. Many people have a prurient/puritanical view of violence, especially deadly violence. It will come out in how they relate to him. Kids who don't have well-integrated values may react even more poorly than adults.

I just hope that there are enough people he looks up to - adults and peers - who will let him know that he did the right thing and that they respect him for it. That will help more than anything.

Counseling is only as good as the person administering it. The best ones I find are the ones who don't project anything of their own values (but rather society's) into the patient. Hard to do and even harder to find but I've known some who do work using the method of simply being a guide to the person struggling with whatever. They don't answer questions directly, but rather, they allow the patient to find the answers within themselves and only nudge them in the right direction.

Your point about kids not having a good set of values ingrained is a good one... and an important one. Repeatedly we've seen on this forum the results of a lack of good solid values that are worthy (in our eyes here on MT anyway) to instill into young people. Those without turn out to be the young punks that we decry when we read stories about abusive behavior towards elderly, smaller children than themselves, poor attitudes towards police and so on and so on.

This kid whether consciously or unconsciously, had acted instinctively. He saw a threat to his own survival and acted upon it. Being human he took the most viable choice there was.
Again, here on MT, we've talked about making use of whatever is within our grasp/reach to defend ourselves. This kid saw the knife and grabbed it. He knows (like many other kids) that a knife is a formidable weapon and an effective one. Note, I said like many other kids... as an adult the knife would've also been the choice weapon rather than say a chair or something else that would've been just as effective. If there were a gun present in the house (even if it were in the next room) it's doubtless that the kid would've gone for it because again, he would know that it's an effective weapon.
Kids can move surprisingly fast when well motivated.

Changes at the hands of his peers? Again I have no argument and am in total agreement. But peers with a "prurient/puritanical view of violence, especially deadly violence" I highly doubt it. Remember he's 12 yrs. old. Think of the types of video games that he and/or his peers would be playing: Grand Theft Auto, Halo, Call Of Duty and so on and so on... Just because they're 12 doesn't mean they can't get their hands on these games, in spite of the parental guidance warning on the box.
I'd dare say his peers would likely make him a hero and begin looking up to him. Maybe not in front of their parents but when they're alone together... yeah, I'd think they would. I got praise from my peers when I beat the crap out of an older student during my years in jr. highschool. Got yelled at and admonished by the teachers and my parents... but man, my friends for a while thought I was the man!

The kid will need some long term help. The mom as well. Traumatic thing to look up and see blood spray/splatter on her kitchen floor/walls the man who was hurting her dead, and her "baby" standing there blood on himself and that "look in his eyes".

 

[sgtmac_46]

Counseling may or may not help. Very often when people are clear about why they did what they did and believe that it was the right thing to do counseling muddies and confuses. There's also an excellent chance that any but the best sort of counselor will project onto the boy how he feels the kid should feel. That said it should be available if his mother thinks it is called for.

He will certainly undergo some changes at the hands of his peers. Many people have a prurient/puritanical view of violence, especially deadly violence. It will come out in how they relate to him. Kids who don't have well-integrated values may react even more poorly than adults.

I just hope that there are enough people he looks up to - adults and peers - who will let him know that he did the right thing and that they respect him for it. That will help more than anything.

That's exactly right......ESPECIALLY if the counselor has never been through such a life or death situation......often times counselors really have no frame of reference for what REALLY goes on in such an incident. The kid SHOULD feel justified in doing what he did, yet some counselors believe you SHOULD feel guilty!


That's why police officers who have been involved in a lethal force situation are directed to other officers who have been involved in those situations....not someone who hasn't. And the most important thing to hear, be it soldiers, police officer, or joe public, when you've had to hurt or kill someone in LEGITIMATE self-defense is......no matter what you're feeling, you DID the RIGHT THING! Guilt is NORMAL....and NOT feeling guilt is NORMAL! Neither one makes you a bad person.

 

[sgtmac_46]

Kid did the right thing if the facts of the case are as presented in the story.....pure and simple.

 

[KenpoTex]

Just a though regarding the comments about how what he said ("I had to kill him...") might work against him...
While what he said may not have been the best choice of words, he's only 12, he's not going to have the background/training that most of us have. While there may be a time where we find ourselves in a situation where we know we have to kill the guy to survive, we're trained to say "I was in fear for my life and was just trying to make him stop" (or something of that nature). Better yet, we shut up entirely and let our lawyer do the talking. Hopefully, this won't count against him.

The boy did the right thing in a difficult situation. There were other "right" things he could have done (called the police, hit the man over the head with a chair, etc.) that would have been less likely to be fatal...

The problem I have with your statement is: what would have happened if he had tried a "less lethal" alternative (hitting him with a chair, etc.) and it didn't stop the threat? To do that would possibly be to give up his only chance to actually prevail against the person. I personally feel that there are situations where the immediate use of deadly force is not only morally justified, but also tactically correct.
And seriously, what good would it have done to call the cops? Does anyone really think that they would have been able to show up in time to keep the guy from choking the kids mom to death?