Brandon O’Quinn Rasberry, 32, was shot in the head in 2022 while he slept at an RV park in Nixon, Texas, about 60 miles (97 kilometers) east of San Antonio, investigators said. He had just moved in a few days before.

The boy’s possible connection to the case was uncovered after sheriff’s deputies were contacted on April 12 of this year about a student who threatened to assault and kill another student on a school bus. They learned the boy had made previous statements that he had killed someone two years ago.

The boy was taken to a child advocacy center, where he described for interviewers details of Rasberry’s death “consistent with first-hand knowledge” of the crime, investigators said.

  • Zorg@lemmings.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    7 months ago

    They unfortunately do, but at that age the brain is still partially goo:

    According to the National Organization of Victims of Juvenile Murderers, cognitive function develops concrete to abstract between the ages of 12 and 15. This means that a person can genuinely understand that specific behavior brings specific consequences. However, research has shown that a teenager’s brain does not resemble an adult’s fully matured brain until they reach their early 20’s. Source: Google’s summary for "has a 12 year old brain developed enpugh to understand murder

    • I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      7 months ago

      The kid is rotten. While he may still be developing, most kids do not kill strangers in cold blood. He was either already on track to develop into a psychopath, or the murder firmly put him on that path. Note how he got caught because he was bragging about it.

      Is it too late to save the kid? Maybe not, it’s certainly worth trying. But considering what he did, and the environment he’s living in, I don’t foresee him getting the dedicated mental resources he needs.

      • Halosheep@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        13
        ·
        7 months ago

        I always wonder why people think murderers are “worth saving”. My guy stole someone’s entire life, why should he get to have one and have special attention made to it?

        • nickwitha_k (he/him)@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          7 months ago

          The scope is far greater than eye for an eye. While they’ll never be able to undo what they did, there is a possibility that they may make positive contributions to society. Contributions that could save multiple lives. That’s not even going into the problems of allowing a state to ritualistically murder people.

          • interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            7 months ago

            What if we measure that some people make a negative contribution to society ?

            I don’t mean criminals even, just people who are for a reason or another, a net loss, and we know for sure.

            • NιƙƙιDιɱҽʂ@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              8
              ·
              edit-2
              7 months ago

              You’ll always have people who are a net loss. That’s the whole point of living in a society, to overcome together and take care of those that cannot take care of themselves. If everyone was self sufficient, we never would have joined together to be the herd animals that we are.

              “The measure of a civilization is how it treats its weakest members.”

                • NιƙƙιDιɱҽʂ@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  I disagree that it undermines that at all. Some people are able to be rehabilitated, some aren’t. Aside from that, are you trying to say that because someone is a net loss to society they should just be cast aside?

                  • nickwitha_k (he/him)@lemmy.sdf.org
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    7 months ago

                    I disagree that it undermines that at all. Some people are able to be rehabilitated, some aren’t.

                    In addition, rehabilitation, like other complex psychological things like grief, is not a linear nor fully understood thing. Someone exhibiting anti-social behavior may not be able to be rehabilitated at a given time due to many possible factors, be it intrinsic to the individual or collective knowledge. Even if one cannot be safely re-integrated into society, there are ways that they can voluntarily contribute and likely would choose to, even if it were for selfish reasons (ex. many serial killers are aware that there is something profoundly wrong with them and happy to contribute data to prevent others or get their names in books).

        • Crikeste@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          It’s just violence all the way down with you people, isn’t it?

          You: “I don’t like murderers, so I want the government to become the murderer of murderers!”

          • Halosheep@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            7 months ago

            This doesn’t even remotely address my genuine question. It’s just dickheadedness all the way down with you people isn’t it?

            You: “I just make random shit up and say you said it, I’m infinitely intelligent.”

    • Rob T Firefly@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      I read things like this and they make reasonable sense, but at the same time I’m fairly sure I remember being much younger than that and still knowing that it’d be wrong to kill someone.

    • interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      7 months ago

      People thinking like a premeditated murderer when is obviously an impulse act that got their hands on a loaded gun and a brain full of movies tell him that’s for pointing and shooting.

      He probably did it because that’s what guns do you point them at heads and click them.

      Then shit got way more real than he ever imagined. And it’s too late now. Imagine “oh shit I’m in trouble” of kids doing stupid stuff. Except this time mommy can’t help. Nobody can’t help.

      Though shit for a 7 year old, I almost can’t believe he kept it in for more than two years

      • Fades@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        that’s what guns do you point them at heads and click them.

        With real guns, you don’t click them but instead you use your actual hands and finger to make em fire.

        Jokes aside, you could update your initial example from movie to vgame and click would make more sense contextually :)

        also, that was the first thing I said to myself, how the hell can a youngin hold something in THAT FUCKING SERIOUS for THAT FUCKING LONG?! I did dumb shit as a kid and a few weeks of guilt were hell. We ain’t all built the same i guess