Years after it was settled, the case of the King Brothers continues to baffle many people. Actually, many people have never understood how this happened because even the offenders themselves were too young to understand the terrible thing they did. According to reports, the two boys, Alex and Derek King who were aged twelve and thirteen years respectively killed their father with a baseball bat (Morrison, 2009). Indeed, this case follows a similar pattern to that of many other young offenders. In order to understand this pattern, it is imperative to first look at the upbringing of the King Brothers in order to determine what triggered their action.
The fact that crimes committed by young offenders follow a similar pattern is a subject that has extensively been discussed by Robert Hanser (2007) in his book titled Special Needs Offenders. According to Hanser, majority of the young offenders come from broken homes and this was true with the King Brothers. According to Keith Morrison (2009), the boys’ mother had abandoned them when they were six and seven years respectively thus leaving the burden of bringing them up with their father who did not have a stable job at that time. With no feasible means to raise the two boys, the elder son Derek King had to be sent away to live with a foster family (Morrison, 2009).
Another thing that has been discussed by Hanser (2007) and one that comes out in this case is the influence of the society on young minds. According to the proceedings of the case, it is obvious that Rick Chavis influenced the decision taken by the boys at the time. As it turned out during the proceedings, Rick Chavis was also having a sexual affair with Alex who admitted that the idea to kill his father was his own but in reality, he must have gotten the idea from Chavis (Morrison, 2009).
In trying to rehabilitate the two boys, one thing that must be remembered is that juveniles are more prone to negative impact and external pressure. Like many other juveniles, the character of the King Brothers was not as well formed as that of an adult. By analyzing their behavior, it is obvious that their personality trait was transitory if their actions are anything to go by. This can be seen from the way the brothers first owned up to the murder then later changed their story and blamed Rick Chavis. Although the crime committed by the boys is without doubt grave, their age should be considered in their sentencing. Instead of handing them a punitive sentence, the judge should have taken the boys in to a rehabilitation center since in such cases rehabilitation plays a more important role than deterrence (Yehia, 2007). Although a crime was committed, it is obvious that its nature was not that of an adult crime but was rather derived from the offender’s state of dependency and immaturity, which made them to follow the orders of Rick Chavis. For this reason, rehabilitation in a children’s home would be the most suited method to correct the boys.
The King Brothers case continues to draw much attention long after it was decided. Up to date, many people cannot still understand how two young boys who were barely in their teens could manage to not only kill their father but also go ahead to burn down their house to cover the crime. As shocking as this can be, there is no doubt that the society was to blame for this incidence. To begin with, the break-up of the boy’s family must have been depressing for the brothers and they had to look for emotional support from their neighbor who in turn influenced them to commit the crime. This is something that the judge should have considered while passing out the judgment and instead of punishing the boy’s he should have taken them to a rehabilitation center where they could be given moral guidance.
References
Hanser, R. (2007). Special Needs Offenders in the Community. Pearson/ Prentice Hall.
Morrison, K. (2009). Second Chances: Dateline Checks in with the Brothers Accused of Killing their Father in 2001. Web.
Yehia, D. (2007). Youth as a Mitigating Factor: To What Extent does the Principle Survive? Web.