[Cody Dawg]

Link.

CHARLESTON, South Carolina (CNN) -- A judge sentenced a 15-year-old boy Tuesday to 30 years in prison for killing his grandparents after jurors rejected defense arguments that taking the antidepressant Zoloft drove the youth to kill.

The jury convicted Chris Pittman earlier Tuesday on two counts of murder in the 2001 slayings of his paternal grandparents, Joe and Joy Pittman.

In closing arguments Monday, prosecutor John Meadors belittled the defense's contention that Zoloft influenced Pittman, then 12, to carry out the shootings, calling such an argument a "smoke screen."

"The only issue is -- did he know the difference between right and wrong?" Meadors said.

Sentencing a boy who committed a crime at the age of 12...to life in prison?



Did he know the difference between right and wrong?

Probably.


But not as much as we adults do: We have to know that sentencing a boy to a term of life in prison, who was under the influence of drugs, is wrong.

[Severed Hand of Skywalker]

Still, the dude did shoot his grandparents when they were asleep and torch the damn house for no real good reason.

I am not sure what the hell else the court should have done.

And I agree that the drug thing was a smoke screen.

[saddino]

Through an uncontested stipulation, Pittman's attorneys have acknowledged that the boy carried a shotgun into his grandparents' bedroom on November 28, 2001, shot them to death in their sleep and burned down their house outside Chester, South Carolina.

But prosecution psychiatrist Dr. Pamela Crawford said the boy did, as evidenced that he burned down the house to conceal the crime. "It shows not only that he knew it was wrong, that he knew it was legally wrong to do this," Crawford testified.

Terribly sad. But criminal intent can be stipulated by his trying to hide the crime. So, as much as I'd like to think of an alternative punishment, he is guilty and thus must face the consequences.

Also, the drug he was on was Zoloft, which he was taking by prescription. It wasn't like he was on PCP (which is known to cause psychotic episodes). The FDA has found Zoloft can cause "suicidal thinking" in teens with depression. Killing your grandparents doesn't sound very "suicidal" to me ("homicidal" is more like it). The defense position ("Zoloft made him do it") doesn't sound very plausible.

[Cody Dawg]

He did it when he was 12 years old.

That's a little kid, for Pete's sake!

So, now he should spend the rest of his childhood with rapists and murderers in an adult prison?

Gimme a break!

[Severed Hand of Skywalker]

Originally posted by Cody Dawg:
He did it when he was 12 years old.

That's a little kid, for Pete's sake!

So, now he should spend the rest of his childhood with rapists and murderers in an adult prison?

Gimme a break!

What else should they do? Spank him?

[Cody Dawg]

I think he should go to a juvenile detention facility and be rehabilitated.

I don't think he should be in prison for the rest of his life, no.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally posted by Cody Dawg:
He did it when he was 12 years old.

That's a little kid, for Pete's sake!

So, now he should spend the rest of his childhood with rapists and murderers in an adult prison?

Gimme a break!

He committed an adult crime so he shold do the adult time. Sorry!

[saddino]

Cody, I live in Washington, D.C. where it isn't unsusal for teens to kill. So, if you were to visit D.C. and a 12 year old were to kill your children during your visit what do you think the appropriate punishment would be for your childrens' murderer?

[Skip Breakfast]

I can't speak for Zoloft, but I was mistakenly prescribed Paxil and threw it away after two days of completely psychotic behavior. I actually was terrified because I felt like I could hurt someone and feel no remorse.

[effgee]

questions over questions ...

• who raised that kid and what kind of values was he taught to commit a crime like this?
• what kind of fudgepickle would keep his shotgun and ammo (more or less) accessible to a 12yr old?
• why was the kid in psychiatric care for only 6 days?
• why are drugs that are not approved for kids prescribed regularly anyway?
• etc., etc., ...

weird.

[Cody Dawg]

I took Paxil once after the death of a loved one because I was so darned depressed.

Know what it did?

It made me feel like a zombie. No emotions. No feelings. Nothing.

No wonder people who take that crap commit bad behaviors and have no sex drive because it makes you completely numb psychologically and physically.

I stopped taking it after about a month because I truly felt like a different person. It's better to be depressed than to take that crap, to be honest.

I believe that this boy is in trouble, in part, because of Zoloft. I honestly believe that.

I do not think he is 100% responsible for his behavior, no.

He was under the influence of a drug.

It's sort of like being medicinally insane.

[OldManMac]

He didn't get life; he got 30 years, and at the age of 15, that's a huge difference. Under the conditions he killed his grandparents in, there isn't a lot of wiggle room, IMO. Yes, he's a child, but he didn't just rob somebody or threaten somebody; he committed the ultimate act; he took two lives.

He most likely will be sent to a juvenille facility until he's 21, and then go to an adult facility.

[Severed Hand of Skywalker]

Originally posted by Cody Dawg:


It's sort of like being medicinally insane.

Sorry but just about everyone is under some sort of drug now including millions on Paxil/Zoloft, they are not going around killing each other because of it.

[Skip Breakfast]

Oh I had emotions alright. I was angry, and quite happy being angry. NOT GOOD.

[Millennium]

Originally posted by Cody Dawg:
He did it when he was 12 years old.

That's a little kid, for Pete's sake!

It doesn't take much to teach a little kid that killing people is wrong. Zoloft can indeed cause suicidal thinking in adolescents, but it is worth noting that the kid did not commit suicide; there is a big difference between killing oneself and killing other people.

So, now he should spend the rest of his childhood with rapists and murderers in an adult prison?[/B]

No, but he won't. As others have pointed out, he will be held in a juvenile center until he comes of age, at which point he will be transferred to an "adult prison" to serve out the rest of his sentence.

I can see a lot of good in sentencing kids to lighter terms for relatively petty crimes. Violent crime, however, is another matter entirely.

[Cody Dawg]

I took Paxil once after the death of a loved one because I was so darned depressed.

Know what it did?

It made me feel like a zombie. No emotions. No feelings. Nothing.

No wonder people who take that crap commit bad behaviors and have no sex drive because it makes you completely numb psychologically and physically.

I stopped taking it after about a month because I truly felt like a different person. It's better to be depressed than to take that crap, to be honest.

I believe that this boy is in trouble, in part, because of Zoloft. I honestly believe that.

I do not think he is 100% responsible for his behavior, no.

He was under the influence of a drug.

It's sort of like being medicinally insane.

[turtle777]

Cody, are you into DP'ing today ?
Or is that the side-effect of an undisclosed drug

-t

[Athens]

guess the US dosent have something that protects youth like our Young Offenders act.

The name of a youth who commits a crime should never be released.
Pictures of the youth who commits a crime should not be released.
Youth should never get more then 10 years when commiting a crime as a youth this includes murder.

[olePigeon]

I think it's fine that he got sentenced, but you people are blowing it out of proportion. They're going to appeal for 5 years, then plea-bargain to 15 years after everyone's sick of it, and he'll get out in 5 on good behavior.

That's how it works when you murder people in this country.

[Millennium]

Originally posted by Cody Dawg:
No wonder people who take that crap commit bad behaviors and have no sex drive because it makes you completely numb psychologically and physically.

If this were a crime of passion, then that might be one thing: in this case, doing something just to feel alive again. But from all accounts, that isn't what happened. This was in cold blood.

[MacNStein]

Originally posted by olePigeon:
I think it's fine that he got sentenced, but you people are blowing it out of proportion. They're going to appeal for 5 years, then plea-bargain to 15 years after everyone's sick of it, and he'll get out in 5 on good behavior.

That's how it works when you murder people in this country.

Actually, I think he'll end up with 8-10, but otherwise I agree with you.

[Millennium]

Originally posted by Athens:
guess the US dosent have something that protects youth like our Young Offenders act.

The name of a youth who commits a crime should never be released.
Pictures of the youth who commits a crime should not be released.
Youth should never get more then 10 years when commiting a crime as a youth this includes murder.

Names and pictures are usually not released while the trial is underway. In this case, the trial is over.

As for the ten-year limit, no. In the US, it is commonly believed that even a child can have enough of a sense of right and wrong to not murder his own grandparents in cold blood. Children get into mischief, yes, but there is a difference between mischief ans this.

[Cody Dawg]

I still think that this is not quite fair.

He was still a 12-year old when this happened.

Do any of you think that putting a 12-year old in prison is okay?



Seriously?

[Person Man]

Originally posted by Millennium:
Zoloft can indeed cause suicidal thinking in adolescents

Let me start by saying that I am a physician, but I am not a psychiatrist.

I don't think there is enough evidence to say that Zoloft (or Paxil or any of the other SSRIs-- selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors) CAUSES suicidal behavior.

The fact is people get depressed enough to commit suicide. Kids can get depressed enough to commit suicide. They (kids and adults) can also become so depressed that they're too depressed to actually carry out their suicidal intentions.

Yes Zoloft and Paxil have no indications for children. That's because they haven't been studied enough in children. But there are MANY antidepressants besides SSRIs that also haven't been studied in children. Yet we give these adult drugs to them anyways. Why? Because they work.

The problem may not be the SSRI causing suicidal behavior. It may be that the person was too depressed at first to carry out their plans. Once they're on the medication, they start to feel better, but not completely better. They feel better enough to act on their suicidal thoughts. If you can get people through this, then once the medication works more (it can take up to 12 weeks for full effects to be seen) they may no longer be depressed enough to kill themselves. The period of time when a person is MOST VULNERABLE to killing themselves is just after starting treatment.

The other problem is insufficient monitoring of these patients. SSRIs are not miracle drugs. They are not the be-all-end-all that many people think them to be. First off, if I had a kid in my practice who was depressed, I would send them to a child psychiatrist for treatment. Period. Children are different enough than adults that family doctors or internists who treat adolescents should NOT start them on any anti-depressant (whether indicated for children or not). The child psychiatrist should start by doing a full assessment of the child. If they think an antidepressant is warranted they should start them on whatever they feel is best for that child (again, whether formally indicated by the FDA or not). Then, once they have started the child on the drug, they should (along with the parents and teachers, etc) CLOSELY WATCH the child, as well as providing other psychological therapies, ESPECIALLY during the early stages.

I think what happens is that little Billy or Susie is depressed, but too depressed to kill themselves. Mom or Dad takes them to the family doctor, who puts them on Zoloft. Everybody thinks "OK, problem solved. No need to do anything further" Billy or Susie starts feeling better, but not completely better. They kill themselves. The finger gets pointed at Zoloft, because as a society, nobody wants to take the blame themselves for not properly monitoring Billy or Susie after being started on the drug. (As an example of what I mean, I know a pediatrician who was successfully sued for $8 million because the parents did not follow instructions. He was on call in an emergency room and a mother brought her 6 year old in with an earache. The doctor looked at the patient and saw he had an ear infection. He prescribed an antibiotic and told the mother THAT IF THE KID GOT ANY WORSE TO BRING THEM BACK IMMEDIATELY. The kid got sicker. The parents WAITED TWO DAYS to seek further help. By the time they brought the kid back to the ER, the infection had spread to the brain, causing meningitis. The kid died. Now tell me, how in the HELL did the doctor commit malpractice? And don't say he should have admitted the child the first time. That's like using a sledgehammer to kill a fly. It all boiled down to the parents not wanting to take responsibility for not following the doctor's instructions in the first place. And the jury fell for it hook, line, and sinker. The case is still being appealed, and there's a very good chance the doctor will be found not guilty).

Just my 2 cents. And I do believe that with further studies, there will eventually be enough evidence to show that the medications don't CAUSE suicidal thoughts. After all, if you give the medicines to someone who DOESN'T already have thoughts of suicide you will not cause them to start having those thoughts.

Oh, and Cody Dawg, I hope you talked to your doctor before stopping the Paxil. There is nothing I hate more than a patient who just stops taking a drug I prescribed for them without telling me. Why? 1. Because if a drug causes a problem I want to know about it, so I can do something about it. 2. Because sometimes just stopping a medicine abruptly can cause problems. I have no doubt that Paxil made you feel like you weren't yourself. Fine. Tell your doctor how it made you feel. He/She will most likely change therapies. They may reduce the dose, help you stop it altogether and start something else, or send you to a specialist. If your doctor tells you that it's "all in your head," or "you'll do what I tell you to because I'm the doctor and you're the patient," then your doctor is a jerk and it's time for you to find another one.

[OldManMac]

He will not wind up in prison!! He'll go to a youth facility until he's twenty one. Then he'll wind up in prison, where he belongs after he's 21. What do you propose; a spanking, or a slap on the wrist, with the admonishment to be a good little boy? He killed two people, in cold blood! The medicine didn't do it; he did! Whether the medicine was a contributory factor is not up to us to decide; that's what we have juries, judges, and medical experts for, and apparently they've decided differently than you did, and that's what counts. Move on.

[Xeo]

Originally posted by Cody Dawg:
I still think that this is not quite fair.

He was still a 12-year old when this happened.

Do any of you think that putting a 12-year old in prison is okay?



Seriously?

In kid-prison, yes.

12 year olds are out having sex and drinking. They are young adults. They are at the age where they are starting to rebel. This kid seriously had a problem with his grandparents and decided to kill them. He thought about it, carried it through, and is now going to face the consequences.

If he didn't serve any time at all, or was only in until 18, then kids would (and some do) commit all kinds of crimes cause they know they can get away with them as a child.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally posted by Cody Dawg:
Do any of you think that putting a 12-year old in prison is okay?



Seriously?

If that 12-year old is a cold-blooded murderer, absolutely

[ReggieX]

Originally posted by Wiskedjak:
If that 12-year old is a cold-blooded murderer, absolutely

That was almost my exact answer, so yes.

[Cody Dawg]

Okay...

I'm the staunch conservative and I'm the one who is sounding like a bleeding heart liberal.



(Feels body anxiously and peers into mirror...)

I seriously think it's wrong to put a kid that was taking a medication that causes psychotic breaks in prison for murder...especially when he was 12 when he committed the crime.

Call me silly, but that's what I think.

[TETENAL]

In Germany children under 14 can not be punished.

[Person Man]

Originally posted by Cody Dawg:
taking a medication that causes psychotic breaks in prison for murder

There is not enough evidence to say that the medication CAUSES psychotic breaks.

How would you punish the child?

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by Cody Dawg:
I seriously think it's wrong to put a kid that was taking a medication that causes psychotic breaks in prison for murder...especially when he was 12 when he committed the crime.

Call me silly, but that's what I think.

You state that causation like it is a fact. The drug thing is just what the kid's attorney argued -- probably because that's all he had to work with because the evidence was damning. The jury apparently didn't buy it because they found him guilty.

You do realize that pretty much every defendant has some sob story or another do you? Are you going to let everyone off for murder if they have a prescription?

[Severed Hand of Skywalker]

Originally posted by Person Man:
There is not enough evidence to say that the medication CAUSES psychotic breaks.

How would you punish the child?

Meds or not there was lots of evidence that he had mental problems before taking any meds.

[Dale Sorel]

Originally posted by Cody Dawg:
We have to know that sentencing a boy to a term of life in prison, who was under the influence of drugs, is wrong.

12 years old + 30 years doesn't equal life in prison

[Person Man]

Originally posted by Severed Hand of Skywalker:
Meds or not there was lots of evidence that he had mental problems before taking any meds.

That's not my question. My question is how would she punish the kid?

Also, how would she punish the kid if he were "normal" and had no psychiatric problems whatsoever and was taking no medication?

[Cody Dawg]

I think he should have been punished as a juvenile, first of all, since he was a juvenile when the crime was committed.

Secondly, he was obviously depressed or mentally disturbed. If Paula Yates can have a break for killing her own children in cold blood, this little kid could have also.

Oh, and Cody Dawg, I hope you talked to your doctor before stopping the Paxil.

Don't you remember when I called you, doctor?



Thirdly, I think he should stay in a juvenile prison facility until he's 21 and then be put up for parole and if a parole board feels he is successfully rehabilitated then he could be moved to a halfway house and spend 5 to 10 years on parole.

[Person Man]

Originally posted by Cody Dawg:
I think he should have been punished as a juvenile, first of all, since he was a juvenile when the crime was committed.

As many others have stated, that's probably what will happen. he probably will not go to an adult jail.

Don't you remember when I called you, doctor?

Double

Thirdly, I think he should stay in a juvenile prison facility until he's 21 and then be put up for parole and if a parole board feels he is successfully rehabilitated then he could be moved to a halfway house and spend 5 to 10 years on parole.

This is still probably what will end up happening anyway. I didn't see that they sentenced him without possibility of parole.

[Cody Dawg]

The doctor looked at the patient and saw he had an ear infection. He prescribed an antibiotic and told the mother THAT IF THE KID GOT ANY WORSE TO BRING THEM BACK IMMEDIATELY. The kid got sicker. The parents WAITED TWO DAYS to seek further help. By the time they brought the kid back to the ER, the infection had spread to the brain, causing meningitis. The kid died. Now tell me, how in the HELL did the doctor commit malpractice? And don't say he should have admitted the child the first time. That's like using a sledgehammer to kill a fly. It all boiled down to the parents not wanting to take responsibility for not following the doctor's instructions in the first place. And the jury fell for it hook, line, and sinker. The case is still being appealed, and there's a very good chance the doctor will be found not guilty).

Better to be safe than sorry and admit the child, don't you think? We need more facts. Did they run a blood count? What was the WBC? Any signs of infection? Why weren't IV antibiotics administered to ensure that the child was appropriately medicated?

See, there is your side (or your friend's side) and then the parent's side and then there is the truth.

The truth is that doctors don't want to admit people to the hospital because the hospital doesn't like it -- unless the person has super-dooper insurance -- along with their HMO who is hoarding the pot of cash and wants to treat so conservatively that patients end up dead.



Nice segue, by the way.

[Cody Dawg]

But, just to let you know, I'm on your side about this issue.

There are too many lawyers whispering in parents' ears and encouraging bogus lawsuits. Lawyers know the insurance companies will pay.

That's why Florida has a dearth of adequate specialists right now and in our county, Palm Beach county, there is a stunning lack of cardiology and obstetric specialists.

I think it's terrible.

[Person Man]

Originally posted by Cody Dawg:
Better to be safe than sorry and admit the child, don't you think? We need more facts. Did they run a blood count? What was the WBC? Any signs of infection? Why weren't IV antibiotics administered to ensure that the child was appropriately medicated?

See, there is your side (or your friend's side) and then the parent's side and then there is the truth.



Nice segue, by the way.

That's not the case. The child did not need to be admitted at the time the initial assessment was made. The doctor probably did run a blood count. Yes, there was a sign of infection. He saw the infected ear with his otoscope. The kid got a shot of Rocephin (one of the "big guns") and was given an antibiotic to take by mouth. In his opinion, the kid was not sick enough to be admitted. You don't admit every kid with an ear infection "just to be safe." But, there is still a (very small but significant) chance that the infection will get worse in spite of treatment. That's beside the point.

Would YOU wait two more days to take your kid back if he got much sicker?

The truth is that doctors don't want to admit people to the hospital because the hospital doesn't like it -- unless the person has super-dooper insurance -- along with their HMO who is hoarding the pot of cash and wants to treat so conservatively that patients end up dead.

By the way, it is not true that this doctor didn't want to admit the kid to the hospital because the hospital didn't want him to. You can't use that as a successful defense in a malpractice suit anyway. If the patient needs admitted, then you admit the patient regardless of what the hospital or insurance company thinks. Even if the patient has no insurance. He used his best judgement at the time and did not think the kid needed admission.

As I said, the case is in appeal and it is believed that he will win on appeal. (by both doctors and laypeople)

Besides, who do you think is going to get most of the $8 million? Hint: not the parents.

[Agent69]

I do think it is interesting how people under 18 can be treated as adults in criminal court but are denied the rights of adults in every other aspect of life.

[Cody Dawg]

Isn't that true?

I mean, you can be drafted and prosecuted as a teenager but you cannot legally drink.

What a hypocrisy.

I've always thought that ALL armed services members should be able to drink, period.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally posted by Agent69:
I do think it is interesting how people under 18 can be treated as adults in criminal court but are denied the rights of adults in every other aspect of life.

Murder isn't a right

[Cody Dawg]

I think he's talking about other "rights."



Like voting. Being on a jury.

Drinking.

[Person Man]

Originally posted by Cody Dawg:
I think he's talking about other "rights."



Like voting.

Except you can vote when you're 18.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally posted by Cody Dawg:
I think he's talking about other "rights."



Like voting. Being on a jury.

Drinking.

I don't think two can be compared. Voting, jury duty and responsible drinking require rational thought, murder does not.

[Cody Dawg]

MY point is that you can be drafted and give your life for your country at the age of 18...

But you cannot DRINK ALCOHOL.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally posted by Cody Dawg:
MY point is that you can be drafted and give your life for your country at the age of 18...

But you cannot DRINK ALCOHOL.

Neither of those have anything to do with murder. Though, I agree that the drinking age is too high.

[Superchicken]

Having worked with youth a lot, 12 year olds are around the grade 6 age, you can get some SCREWED UP grade sixers. I should know, we have some in our youth group. They know what they're doing, and they don't care. That said, these are at least kids that have parents that care about em enough to take em to youth group, and these are at least kids that have SOME people who love em. Imagine kids who don't have that in their development. I don't know what other things you could do but lock the kid up... granted he probably needs MAJOR therapy, but... I wouldn't want him playing with my kids.

[stevesnj]

Being a teacher who assists high school kids who are on this Zoloft medication it seems s clear that this is NOT a good remedy for their ills. Seeing the consistant effects on all the students I encounter on this medication and seeing their behavior before they were perscribed it I say take this stuff off the market. It is too consistantly adverse to kids. The quick violent behavior can be scary even to someone trained in the field to care for them. The drug didn't do the killing but it was most definately the gunpowder that sparked the violence.