Posted on 07/07/2005 1:03:17 PM PDT by BenLurkin
LANCASTER - The prosecution on Wednesday asked a juvenile court judge for a finding of second-degree murder against Greg Harris, a 13-year-old charged with wielding a baseball bat to kill Jeremy Rourke, 15, after an April Pony League game at a Palmdale ball field. The defense called Harris' actions "imperfect self-defense."
Juvenile delinquency court judge Richard E. Naranjo heard opening arguments from both sides and testimony from witnesses called by the state.
Lonnie Felker, the deputy district attorney, submitted as evidence the baseball bat, a bat bag, a red sock and two photos of the area near the concession stand where the incident took place.
Felker said he would establish that Harris was upset after losing a baseball game, that Rourke had teased and shoved Harris and that Harris then moved about 10 feet away, took the bat out of the bag, removed the red sock from the bat and warned the surrounding crowd to stand back before landing the fatal blows.
Derek Rushing, who managed Harris' team, the Angels, testified that when he called the team in for a talk after the game, Harris left the dugout, but returned when Rushing called to him.
Four of Harris' teammates spoke about the events that occurred when the team went to the concession stand.
According to the young witnesses, the two boys argued, and Harris took out a bat and hit Rourke once in the knee and again in the head, killing him. The young men told their stories plainly and with attention to detail but with little apparent emotion.
The testimonies differed regarding how many times Rourke shoved the defendant during the argument, what exactly was said, how far the defendant had to move to retrieve the bat and Rourke's exact body position when the deadly blow landed, but agreed on many points.
The boys agreed that although approximately 50 people - including adults - were present, no one tried to stop the confrontation.
All said few words were exchanged before the blows. Rourke said the Angels "sucked." Harris told him to stop saying it. Rourke pushed Harris and asked, "What are you gonna do about it?" Then Harris got the bat and neither spoke again.
Two of the witnesses said they did not see the final blow connect.
"I just saw Jeremy fall," one said.
The other said, "No, but I heard it."
Two boys said Harris had warned the crowd to step back.
"He said, 'Back up; I'm gonna hit this guy,' " one said.
"He said, 'Move out of the way, I'm gonna hit this fool,' " the other said. Then "he went over to him and he hit him."
Some said Harris looked "shocked" afterward.
Rocio Dodd, the respiratory therapist who performed CPR on Rourke until the paramedics arrived, said she saw something different when she looked at Harris in the moment after Rourke fell.
Dodd began to weep as she described seeing the bat strike Rourke. Her tears were echoed by Rourke's family in the back row.
When Rourke fell, "I looked right at the young man holding the bat," Dodd said. "He looked angry and his eyes were red, and I didn't see any fear in his eyes. That's why I started scanning for my kids."
She then rushed over to begin CPR, found no sounds of breathing and continued CPR until the paramedics arrived, but never got Rourke to breathe, she said.
The last witness for the prosecution was Deputy Robert Kenney, who interviewed Harris after the attack.
Using an official form, Kenney talked with Harris about the difference between right and wrong, asking for examples of each, the deputy said.
"We asked if it was wrong to strike someone with a bat," Kenney said. "He (Harris) said it was wrong."
Felker submitted a copy of the April 14 autopsy performed by Louise Pena, which found the cause of death to be "blunt force trauma to the head," then rested his case.
In his opening statement, Harris' private defense attorney, William McKinney, emphasized what he termed "a sizable difference in size" between Harris (5 feet, 1 inch tall and weighing 90 pounds) Rourke (about 5 feet, 10 inches tall and weighing more than 100 pounds).
He said of Rourke, "He has been characterized as a class clown. I believe he was more of a bully."
McKinney said the victim had threatened other players and even coaches in the past, and pushed Harris up to six times. He said Harris had "asked (Rourke) not to harass him," and suggested that Rourke might have made a threatening motion between the first and second blow.
McKinney said he would show Harris had acted in "self-defense or imperfect self-defense" and with a "lack of intent to kill."
McKinney is scheduled to begin calling defense witnesses at 2 p.m. today.
Ooops.
The kid went too far in delivering the coup de grace to the head killing him. The first shot on the knee would have made the point.
Since his case is fairly sympathetic, I'm surprised he didn't ask for a jury trial.
He should have been tried as an adult.
Of course, he'll probably be out in five or six years to do it again.
Nobody intervenes when a furious boy picks up a baseball bat to attack. Amazing.
Ohio...Howard Beach...this... It's time to register all baseball bats. (/s)
Well, then clearly he deserved to die.
And remember, kids, if someone throws jello at you in the cafeteria it's OK to throw a live grenade at him.
"Harris and that Harris then moved about 10 feet away, took the bat out of the bag, removed the red sock from the bat and warned the surrounding crowd to stand back before landing the fatal blows."
DA should easily be able to get murder 2 or at least manslaughter. Can you say premeditated? I thought you could.
"The boys agreed that although approximately 50 people - including adults - were present, no one tried to stop the confrontation.
Nobody intervenes when a furious boy picks up a baseball bat to attack. Amazing.
"
That's the part that really snagged my attention. Stuff that like worries me on plane rides sometimes. I have no problem beating (well who am I kidding, that should be Trying to beat ;)) the crap out of a couple of terrorists, but my biggest fear is standing up to take action and the rest of the plane sitting like sheep believing "if you don't move you won't get hurt"
I've been wondering for a while...if you clock somebody over the head with an aluminum bat, does it go "crack!" or "ping!"? Or both?
Sad, sad, sad.
I can't imagine what they were thinking. I assume the deceased thought he was invulnerable because he was almost a foot taller, but were all the adults drunk or high? Did they think boys don't get angry enough to kill? Have they been on Planet Zongo the last 10 years?
"Self defense" seems like a VERY thin argument. Frankly, surprising that an attorney would even attempt it, but that is just my opinion.
============================================================
Interesting observations. The suspect is 13 years old. The other was 2 years older, and NINE INCHES taller than him. Do you know how much difference there is physically between a 13 year old and 15 year old??
The "victim" started the fight. I think the report as we read it here is inadequate to assess the facts. Was the victim still engaging the suspect? Or, did he walk away and get blindsided? If the younger kid had engaged the older one without the bat, what would the result have been? Should the younger one attempt to defend himself against a heaver, taller, older, and probably stronger foe, and get beat to a bloody pulp?
I've coached Little League, Pony League, and High School baseball. There are a lot of 13 year olds who couldn't distinguish between hand-to-hand combat and a "deadly weapon". If he'd picked up a knife or a gun, those weapons might have been no less deadly, but motive would have been clearly established by what he brought to the fight. I've met a lot of 13 year olds who are not sociopaths, who just do stupid things, without evaluating the consequences. Add the fight started by the older, possibly a pattern of harassment from the older, and the younger could have acted impulsively. The EMT saying that she "didn't see fear" in the kids eyes is irrelevant. Sure he was enraged, or he wouldn't have engaged the victim with a bat. She can't judge his heart, or know how he felt at the moment he acted.
There's no evidence presented that this kid acted with premeditation. There's ample evidence that he responded to an attack by an older kid who was much larger than he was. There's some evidence of indifference on the part of adults who were apparently close at hand. If there a pattern can be established of the perp being involved in other fights, of acting with rage, then there may be a limited case for manslaughter. In fact, the defense presented some evidence that the victim harassed ADULTS (!) as well as his peers.
Murder? Sociopath?? I'm no "warm and fuzzy" liberal, but if my own son were the dead young man, I'd have a problem with putting the 13 year old away for life. Tragic things happen. Good kids do stupid, even evil things. But the facts as stated in the article do not establish the young suspect as a sociopath for murders.
As a side note: I was about this kids size at his age, and I got beat up quit a bit. I got hurt pretty badly, and there were no adults around to help. When I was about 17, I hit my "growth spurt", and at 180 lbs, 6'2", the same guys decided to leave me alone. My own son is half Asian, and was even lighter than I was. I told him to do everything possible to avoid a fight, even face embarrassment (which the suspect apparently couldn't handle), but when all else failed, it was "life and death". He couldn't take on kids twice his weight, and expect to survive apart from their tender mercies. I told him that if he had to fight, there's no "Hollywood" - put the other guy down hard. Because, if he did not, he could get killed. Life is not like a movie; self-defense means hurting the other guy, and maybe fatally, to survive.
If you haven't faced a serious self-defense situation with a significant disadvantage in size or weapons, you probably aren't going to understand. And if you haven't worked with 13 year olds to 15 year olds on a regular basis you aren't going to understand how vicious and stupid they can be - even the "good kids".
FReegards.. SFS
I don't know. A fat little kid being harassed by a bully two-years older. I hope jail is avoided.
To me that's the most incriminating aspect of this case. He calmly knew what he was doing. This was not just in blind rage, it was cold and calculated.
Yes I do. And that is what adults are for. The Kid should have just walked away, that would have been the smart thing. Any kid that dumb is not fit to roam free in society, period.
If you haven't faced a serious self-defense situation with a significant disadvantage in size or weapons, you probably aren't going to understand. And if you haven't worked with 13 year olds to 15 year olds on a regular basis you aren't going to understand how vicious and stupid they can be - even the "good kids".
I suspect that there are some severe emotional problems here.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.