Slender Man stabbing: Should juvenile defendants be tried ...



Juvenile sentencing argumentative essayWriting.4. Produce clear and coherent writing in which the development, organization, and style are appropriate to task, purpose, and audience. Writing.5. Develop and strengthen writing as needed by planning, revising, editing, rewriting, or trying a new approach, focusing on addressing what is most significant for a specific purpose and audience. Overview:The purpose of this assignment is for you to evaluate the arguments for juveniles to be tried as adults and the reasons against it. Identify the points of view of the debate using examples from your notes based on the videos and the class reading. Most importantly you must take a position on the issue. Prompt: Are juveniles psychologically competent to be treated as adults in our judicial system?Requirements: All requirements and deadlines must be met for your essay to be graded “No exceptions” It is your responsibility meet them, even if you will be gone. Paper must be in MLA format. An MLA format guide can be found on our class website mrchavezclass. under the tab writing tools. Will follow the basic 5 paragraph format.Citations: All examples should come from the sources described in the overview but if you choose to use outside sources it needs to be citied correctly using proper MLA citation format. Papers that are not citied correctly will be considered plagiarized work and will not be graded. A worked cited page must also be included if outside sources are used. IMPORTANT “Wikipedia is not a source”You must have a completed handwritten graphic organizer in detail or a rough draft based on the graphic organizer for your final to be accepted. Due dates will be discussed in class for specific aspects of the essay. Due dates are firm and any extenuating circumstances must involve parents. Kids In Juvenile Detention Face Risk Of Violent Death As AdultsJUNE 18, 201412:49 PM ET HYPERLINK "" MAANVI SINGH npr newsDelinquent children are much more likely than their non-delinquent peers to die violently later in life, a study finds. And girls who ended up in juvenile detention were especially vulnerable, dying at nearly five times the rate of the general population."This was astonishing," says Linda Teplin, a professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at Northwestern University's medical school and the lead author of the study.The researchers interviewed 1,829 people, ages 10 to 18, who were detained at the Cook County Juvenile Temporary Detention Center in Chicago between 1995 and 1998. The young people were arrested for a variety of reasons, but they weren't necessarily convicted of a crime.The researchers continued to follow up with them over the years. By 2011, 111 of them had died, and more than 90 percent of them were killed with guns. The findings were published?Monday in the journal?Pediatrics."I would have anticipated the death rate to be somewhat higher [than that of the general population], but not the figures that you see,"? HYPERLINK "" Teplin?tells Shots.Young women in the study died at much higher rates than their peers in part because the rate of violent death among women in the general population is relatively low, the researchers say.Delinquent youths from every demographic group died at significantly higher rates than their peers from the Chicago area. And their death rates were nearly twice those of combat troops in wartime Iraq and Afghanistan, the researchers say.But minorities were at particular risk. African-American men in this study had the highest mortality rates, and they were 4 1/2 as likely as the white men to die of homicide. Latino men were five times as likely to die as the general population, and Latino women were nine times as likely to die early.Lack of access to mental health care and other resources may be an important factor. The vast majority of these young delinquents come from poor communities, Teplin says. "Detention centers are where poor kids go. Wealthier kids have other options."The researchers never encountered a juvenile from the affluent suburbs of Chicago, she says. Even though young people from wealthy families may abuse and sell drugs, they generally have better support systems and access to treatments.The kids who end up in juvenile detention often have mental health or substance abuse problems, Teplin notes, but they don't get the care they need.Many of the young people who died in this study dealt drugs and were involved with gangs, the study found. And many had problems with alcohol."So often these kids have an illness like depression. So they self-medicate with drugs," Teplin says. "And then they end up arrested and detained and caught in a downward spiral."The Affordable Care Act has made it a little easier for these young people to get care, Teplin says. The health care law established a?Prevention and Public Health Fund?to support public health initiatives.The law allows families to get low-cost coverage through state or federal exchanges. And it requires insurance companies to guarantee the same amount of?coverage for mental health?as they do for other medical munity intervention programs have also been shown to help catch at-risk youths before they end up in the juvenile detention system, or after they get out. "There are so many things that can be done. There are effective strategies for preventing violence and crime," says?J. David Hawkins, a professor of social work at the University of Washington and co-developer of the?Communities That Care?program, which works with community leaders to implement a series of interventions designed to empower local youth."The first thing that needs to happen is the public needs to know that effective interventions exist," Hawkins tells Shots. And the public needs to put pressure on social institutions to start funding and implementing these programs, he munities That Care has worked in cities and towns around the country to conduct surveys, identify the big issues that affect young people in each area and roll out interventions tailored to fit each community's needs. The process takes a lot of time and money, Hawkins says. As do most other effective public health programs."Crime is expensive," he says. "We have to think about how we can invest more of the resources focused on young people on prevention and successful development instead of exclusively on remediation."Do Juvenile Killers Deserve Life Behind Bars? MARCH 20, 2012? by nina totenberg npr newsThe U.S. Supreme Court hears arguments Tuesday in two homicide cases testing whether it is unconstitutionally cruel and unusual punishment to sentence a 14-year-old to life in prison without the possibility of parole.There are currently 79 of these juvenile killers who will die in prison. What's more, in many states, the penalty is mandatory, meaning neither judge nor jury is allowed to consider the youngster's age or background in meting out the sentence.In cases dealing with punishment for juveniles, context is everything. In 2005, the Supreme Court struck down the death penalty for juveniles, declaring that kids are different from adults. The court said that because of their youth, their brains are literally less developed, they are more impulsive, more subject to peer pressure and less able to see the consequences of their acts.Two years ago, the court used the same rationale when it struck down the penalty of life without parole for nonhomicide crimes committed by juveniles. But in Tuesday's cases, the court faces the question of life without parole in homicide cases.A case from Arkansas involves a teenager who was not the triggerman. Fourteen-year-old Kuntrell Jackson and two other kids held up a?video rental store. One of the other boys pointed a sawed-off shotgun at the cashier, and when she threatened to call the police, shot and killed her. Under Arkansas' felony-murder law, Jackson was deemed just as responsible as the triggerman. He was tried as an adult for aggravated murder and, under state law, received a mandatory sentence of life without parole.The other case, from Alabama, involves Evan Miller, a boy so brutalized as a child that by the time he was arrested for murder at age 14, he had tried to kill himself six times, the first time when he was 5 years old.Miller and a 16-year-old friend went next-door to the home of a neighbor who was dealing drugs to Miller's mother. The neighbor, 52-year-old Cole Cannon, gave the boys liquor and marijuana. Miller consumed a fifth of whiskey as the boys engaged in drinking games with Cannon and planned to steal his wallet.Eventually, a fight broke out and the boys severely beat Cannon, set fires in the trailer and fled, ignoring Cannon's pleas for help. Cannon died of smoke inhalation. The 16-year-old friend made a deal with prosecutors in exchange for his testimony, and got life?with?parole eligibility. Fourteen-year-old Miller got life?without?parole.Bryan Stevenson, the lawyer who represents the boys in both of these cases, will make two basic arguments before the Supreme Court. The first is that a mandatory punishment of life without parole for a 14-year-old is cruel and unusual punishment because the defendant's age and background are irrelevant and cannot mitigate punishment.iKuntrell Jackson, 14, and two other kids held up a?video rental store. One of the other boys shot and killed the cashier. Under Arkansas' felony-murder law, Jackson was deemed just as responsible as the gunman. He was tried as an adult for aggravated murder and, under state law, received a mandatory sentence of life without parole.Courtesy of Equal Justice Initiative"Judges can't consider it. Juries can't consider it. No one can consider it," says Stevenson.The states counter that the juvenile's age has already been considered by taking the death penalty off the table."If the defendant is not going to get the death penalty, then at the very least, the defendant ought to get life without parole" to counterbalance the harm he has inflicted, says Alabama Solicitor General John Neiman.But the big question before the Supreme Court on Tuesday is whether life without the possibility of parole is itself an unconstitutionally cruel and unusual punishment when it is applied to juveniles.Defense lawyer Stevenson notes that the American legal system treats minors as both less culpable and less responsible. Fourteen-year-olds, for instance, are not allowed to drink, to marry, to vote, to serve on juries or even to drive."We're not saying that juvenile offenders who commit homicide can't be punished severely," Stevenson says. "They may even end up spending the rest of their lives in prison. But it's premature, excessive and unfair to say we know this juvenile will never be rehabilitated."Indeed, a brief filed by the Council of Juvenile Correctional Administrators and other juvenile crime experts’ point to many amazing cases of rehabilitation. Among them is 16-year-old Scott Filippi, who shot his mother but after his release joined the Army and became a member of the Presidential Honor Guard.Or there is Raphael Johnson, who shot and killed a classmate when he was 17, but after his release got bachelor's and master's degrees with honors and started a community policing program in Detroit. Or there is Lawrence Wu, a 15-year-old New York gang member who eventually became the editor-in-chief of the?Columbia Law Review.One of the most famous of those who have changed their lives is award-winning actor-producer Charles Dutton. By age 12, he had quit school and was living a life of fights and crime on the streets of Baltimore."I liked getting in trouble," says Dutton. "I enjoyed getting in fights. I enjoyed the challenge of battle."iBy age 17, he was sentenced to prison for manslaughter. Even in prison, though, he continued his fighting ways, assaulting a guard and getting eight years added to his sentence. A decade or so later, he was on his way to "the hole" for solitary confinement when he picked up a book of plays sent to him by a girlfriend. It ended up changing his life. As he puts it, he found what he was "born to do.""Up until that point in time, I didn't really concentrate on the life I had taken," he says. "But only at that moment of rediscovering my own humanity [could I] go back and have a very, very strong and sincere, heartfelt remorse for taking that life." Now, four decades later, he says he thinks of the man he killed every day and wonders who he would have been.Dutton says he understands the desire to avenge a terrible crime, but "there's no sense in destroying a second life if that life is actually redeemable. If there's anyone who still has a modicum of redemption left in their life, it's a juvenile."The states that have adopted life without parole for juvenile killers have a very different view."The one thing that we don't know is what the potential of the life would be that was snuffed out in the crime," says Arkansas Attorney General Dustin McDaniel. "The hypothetical of who might be rehabilitated in prison is a hard one to analyze, but there have to be some circumstances under which these persons can serve life without parole."Indeed, Alabama Solicitor General Neiman notes that 38 of the 50 states authorize life without parole for a 14-year-old convicted of murder, and the federal government authorizes it for 15-year-olds. Part of the justification for that, he observes, is the notion of retribution."As a moral matter, it is OK for a government to say, even if there is a possibility that someone will rehabilitate themselves, if a person commits a sufficiently egregious crime, then they just deserve a very severe sentence," Neiman says.Defense lawyer Stevenson counters that in reality, only 18 states have imposed life without parole on a 14-year-old, and only 79 killers who are 14 or younger are currently serving life-without-parole sentences.Arkansas Attorney General McDaniel says that even if those statistics are accurate, and he disputes them, it doesn't prove much."It's not because society doesn't have the moral stomach to impose those sentences," McDaniel says. "It's because, realistically, 14-year-olds don't commit a lot of murders."Finally, the states argue that life without parole is a sufficiently severe sentence that it will deter at least some juveniles from committing murder.Defense lawyer Stevenson dismisses that argument, echoing the sentiments of many experts who deal with violent juveniles."Most of my clients had never heard of life imprisonment without parole and had no capacity to appreciate what it would mean," Stevenson says. "It takes them years before they even get what it means to be sentenced to life in prison without parole, because they're just not used to thinking that far ahead."Experts link teen brains' immaturity, juvenile crimeNEW YORKBy Malcolm Ritter, Associated PressThe teenage brain, Laurence Steinberg says, is like a car with a good accelerator but a weak brake. With powerful impulses under poor control, the likely result is a crash.And, perhaps, a crime.Steinberg, a Temple University psychology professor, helped draft an American Psychological Association brief for a 2005 case in which the U.S. Supreme Court outlawed the death penalty for crimes committed before age 18.That ruling relies on the most recent research on the adolescent brain, which indicates the juvenile brain is still maturing in the teen years and reasoning and judgment are developing well into the early to mid 20s. It is often cited as state lawmakers consider scaling back punitive juvenile justice laws passed during the 1990s."As any parent knows," wrote Justice Anthony Kennedy for the 5-4 majority, youths are more likely to show "a lack of maturity and an underdeveloped sense of responsibility" than adults. "... These qualities often result in impetuous and ill-considered actions and decisions."He also noted that "juveniles are more vulnerable or susceptible to negative influences and outside pressures, including peer pressure," causing them to have less control over their environment.Some child advocates have pointed to the Supreme Court decision and the research as evidence that teens — even those accused of serious crimes — should not be regarded in the same way as adults in the criminal justice system.Dr. David Fassler, a psychiatry professor at the University of Vermont College of Medicine who has testified before legislative committees on brain development, says the research doesn't absolve teens but offers some explanation for their behavior."It doesn't mean adolescents can't make a rational decision or appreciate the difference between right and wrong," he said. "It does mean, particularly when confronted with stressful or emotional decisions, they are more likely to act impulsively, on instinct, without fully understanding or analyzing the consequences of their actions."Experts say that even at ages 16 and 17, when compared to adults, juveniles on average are more:? Impulsive.? Aggressive.? Emotionally volatile.? Likely to take risks.? Reactive to stress.? Vulnerable to peer pressure.? Prone to focus on and overestimate short-term payoffs and underplay longer-term consequences of what they do.? Likely to overlook alternative courses of action.Violence toward others also tends to peak in adolescent years, says psychiatrist Peter Ash of Emory University. It's mostly likely to start around age 16, and people who haven't committed a violent crime by age 19 only rarely start doing it later, he said.The good news here, he said, is that a violent adolescent doesn't necessarily become a violent adult. Some two-thirds to three-quarters of violent youth grow out of it, he said. "They get more self-controlled."Some of the changes found in behavioral studies are paralleled by changes in the brain itself as youths become adults.In fact, in just the past few years, Steinberg said, brain scans have given biological backing to commonsense notions about teen behavior, like their impulsiveness and vulnerability to peer pressure.It's one thing to say teens don't control their impulses as well as adults, but another to show that they can't, he said. As for peer pressure, the new brain research "gives credence to the idea that this isn't a choice that kids are making to give in to their friends, that biologically, they're more vulnerable to that," he said.Consider the lobes at the front of the brain. The nerve circuitry here ties together inputs from other parts of the brain, said Dr. Jay Giedd of the National Institute of Mental Health.This circuitry weighs how much priority to give incoming messages like "Do this now" versus "Wait! What about the consequences?" In short, the frontal lobes are key for making good decisions and controlling impulses.Brain scans show that the frontal lobes don't mature until age 25, and their connections to other parts of the brain continue to improve to at least that age, Giedd said.The inexplicable behavior and poor judgments teens are known for almost always happen when teens are feeling high emotion or intense peer pressure, conditions that overwhelm the still-maturing circuitry in the front part of brain, Giedd said.As Steinberg sees it, a teenager's brain has a well-developed accelerator but only a partly developed brake.By around 15 or 16, the parts of the brain that arouse a teen emotionally and make him pay attention to peer pressure and the rewards of action — the gas pedal — are probably all set. But the parts related to controlling impulses, long-term thinking, resistance to peer pressure and planning — the brake, mostly in the frontal lobes — are still developing."It's not like we go from becoming all accelerator to all brake," Steinberg said. "It's that we go from being heavy-foot-on-the-accelerator to being better able to manage the whole car."Giedd emphasized that scientists can't yet scan an individual's brain and draw conclusions about how mature he is, or his degree of responsibility for his actions.Brain scans do show group differences between adult and teen brains, he said, "but whether or not that should matter (in the courtroom) is the part that needs to be decided more by the judicial system than the neuroscientist."Steinberg, who frequently testifies on juvenile justice policy and consults with state legislators on the topic, said it's not clear to him how much the research on teen brains affects lawmakers. They seem more swayed by pragmatic issues like the cost of treating teens as adults, he said. But he noted that he has been asked to testify more in the past few years than before.In any case, experts say, there's nothing particularly magic about the age 18 as a standard dividing line between juveniles and adults in the courtroom.Different mental capabilities mature at different rates, Steinberg notes. Teens as young as 15 or 16 can generally balance short-term rewards and possible costs as well as adults, but their ability to consider what might happen later on is still developing, he said.A dividing line of age 18 is better than 15 and not necessarily superior to 19 or 17, but it appears good enough to be justified scientifically, he said.Steinberg said he thinks courts should be able to punish some 16- or 17- year olds as adults. That would be reserved for repeat violent offenders who've resisted rehabilitation by the juvenile justice system, and who could endanger other youth in the juvenile system if they returned. "I don't think there are a lot of these kids," Steinberg said.For the rest, he thinks it makes sense to try rehabilitating young offenders in the juvenile justice system. That's better than sending them through the adult system, which can disrupt their development so severely that "they're never going be able to be a productive member of society," Steinberg said. "You're not doing society any favor at all."Ash said that to decide whom to treat as an adult, courts need some kind of guideline that combines the defendant's age with the crime he's accused of. That should leave room for individual assessments, he said.But "we don't have very good measuring sticks" for important traits like how impulsive a juvenile is, he said.In any case, the decision for each defendant should balance a number of reasons for punishment, like retribution, protecting society, deterring future crime, and rehabilitation, said Ash, who's a member of the American Psychiatric Association's Committee on Judicial Action.Even if a 14-year-old murderer is held morally responsible for the crime, he will have matured by the time he's 18, and in the meantime he may be more amenable to rehabilitation than an adult murderer is, Ash said.In fact, most experts conclude that rehabilitation works better for juveniles than for adult offenders, he said.And just as parents know how irrational juveniles can be, Ash said, they also know that rehabilitation is a key goal in punishing them."What we really want," he said, "is to turn delinquent kids into good adults."Slender Man stabbing: Should juvenile defendants be tried as adults? (+video)By?Cristina Maza, Staff writer?FEBRUARY 17, 2015A?Wisconsin?judge is expected to decide Tuesday whether two Wisconsin girls who police say stabbed their classmate 19 times to placate a fictitious online character will be tried in juvenile or adult court.The girls, who were 12 years old at the time of the near-fatal attack, each face one count of being a party to first-degree intentional attempted homicide. In Wisconsin, juveniles over the age of 10 charged with homicide or attempted homicide are automatically tried as adults.If the girls are tried and convicted in adult court, the ramifications could be lifelong. Wisconsin law states that a person convicted as a juvenile must be released from the system at age 25. If the girls are convicted as adults, they could face up to 65 years in prison. “These mandatory adult sentences are highly controversial for many reasons. Not all juvenile offenders will commit crimes years later, as adults. Efforts to predict which juveniles will and will not continue to offend, regardless of treatment and rehabilitation efforts, have been largely unsuccessful,” wrote Tina Freiburger, associate professor and chair of the criminal justice department at the University of Wisconsin in Milwaukee, in her blog for?the Huffington Post.Many critics of trying juveniles as adults also say that juveniles are not fully capable of comprehending the consequences of their actions and may not have complete control over their behavior.The girls’ lawyers claim that their actions were inspired by Slender Man, an unusually tall fictional character that stalks and abducts children. The girls believed Slender Man would harm them if they did not kill, the lawyers have said.The lawyer for one of the girls, Anthony Cotton, has been particularly vocal in advocating for a lesser charge in juvenile court for his client, saying she thought she was protecting herself and her family.His client had allegedly drawn sketches of Slender Man in a notebook with phrases such as "never alone," ''safer dead," and "can't run."Moreover, Mr. Cotton has said that the treatment his client is now receiving at a mental health institution is “markedly better” than the care she received while held in jail for several months following the May attack.“Right now, she has one-on-one care, she has social workers, she has doctors, she has therapists,” he told?the Associated Press?in November. “There’s professionals who can look at her and monitor her and be involved in the sort of day-to-day treatment.?Jails aren't equipped to do those types of activities, and they're certainly not equipped to do those things for children in most cases.”Even if the girls are tried and convicted as adults, they would begin their prison terms in a juvenile facility. But opponents of trying the girls in adult court argue that the girls could be targets of abuse upon being transferred to adult prison at the age of 18. But Assistant District Attorney Ted Szczupakiewicz, the lead prosecutor in the case, supports charging the girls as adults."There will be probable cause of the specific offense of attempted first degree intentional homicide which allows this matter, in fact, requires this matter to commence in the adult criminal court system," Szczupakiewicz said during the hearing, according to?a local ABC affiliate. It is up to the prosecution to prove that the girls should be tried as adults.The American criminal justice system has placed numerous restrictions on sentences for juveniles. In 2005, the Supreme Court prohibited the death penalty for individuals who committed crimes before age 18. Life sentences without parole are also forbidden for individuals under age 18 who are convicted of any crime other than murder.But Wisconsin is one of the toughest states for underage perpetrators. It has a direct-waiver law that automatically passes to adult court all jurisdiction over homicide cases involving juvenile offenders over the age of 10.Teen accused of Eugene rape after slipping away from Washington County juvenile department staff indicted on chargesEverton Bailey Jr. | The Oregonian/OregonLive?By?Everton Bailey Jr. | The Oregonian/OregonLive?Email the author?|?Follow on Twitter?on September 22, 2014 at 8:26 PM, updated?September 23, 2014 at 3:56 PMA 17-year-old boy?accused of raping a woman in Eugene?after slipping away from a Washington County-supervised trip for youth offenders to a University of Oregon football game last week has been indicted by a grand jury.A?scheduled Monday afternoon court appearance?in Lane County for Jaime Tinoco was cancelled because of the grand jury indictment, according to the Lane County District Attorney's Office. Tinoco is now scheduled to be arraigned at 1:30 p.m. Tuesday in Lane County Juvenile Court.The charges Tinoco was indicted will be announced on Tuesday, the Lane County District Attorney's Office said.Tinoco was arrested on Sept. 13 and accused of beating and raping a 39-year-old woman near Autzen Stadium sometime after the football game, Eugene police said. He faces charges of first-degree rape, first-degree kidnapping, first-degree sexual abuse and second-degree assault.Tinoco was one of 12 children taken to the game by four?Washington County Juvenile Department?staff members, according to the agency. He was sentenced to supervised probation in July for burglary, meth possession and harassment convictions.Staff contacted Eugene police after the game to report Tinoco missing when they couldn't find him, the juvenile department said. He was arrested sometime afterwards.The juvenile department has not said how Tinoco was able to separate from the four staff members and the rest of the group, how long he was missing before the reported rape or if any disciplinary action has been taken against any staff members. Eugene police also has declined to release any further information on the incident, including when juvenile department staff reported Tinoco missing, citing the ongoing criminal investigation.Lynne Schroeder, the juvenile department's director, said on Sept. 16 that an administrative review is underway. The department has since?offered condolences to the victim?and has given general information on the juvenile probation program.Tinoco had been arrested four times between November 2013 and April 2014 in Washington County, according to the juvenile department.Tinoco was arrested by Cornelius police in November 2013 on a charge of unlawful possession of meth. He was later released to his parents. The teen was arrested one month later by Washington County deputies at his home in Cedar Mill on a charge of meth possession and was detained.According to the juvenile department, Tinoco was detained again in February 2014 after Beaverton police arrested him on charges of disorderly conduct and harassment at?Sunset High School. The Beaverton School District said Tinoco was enrolled at the high school for 10th and 11th grade, but withdrew from the school in April 2014.Two months after the arrest, Tinoco was interviewed by Cornelius police in connection with a reported home burglary in December. He was later charged with first-degree burglary and two counts of first-degree theft. Tinoco was being held in juvenile detention when he was interviewed and later charged, the juvenile department said.Tinoco was sentenced to probation during a disposition hearing on July 28 in connection with all four incidents, the juvenile department said. He was convicted of the December 2013 meth possession arrest, February 2014 harassment arrest and the burglary. The remaining charges were dismissed.Terms of his probation include a suspended eight day-term of detention to be used at the discretion of a juvenile counselor, avoid contact with any of the victims, successfully complete a psychological and psychiatric evaluation, abstain from alcohol and drugs, make sure his parents know of his whereabouts at all times and attend school or an educational program.The department did not say how long Tinoco was sentenced to probation or how long he was detained in connection with the December and February arrests.-- Everton Bailey Jr.??2015?.?All rights reserved.Friends of Jaime Tinoco, teen charged in Cedar Mill killing, shocked by accusationsRebecca Woolington | The Oregonian/OregonLive?By?Rebecca Woolington | The Oregonian/OregonLive?Email the author?|?Follow on Twitter?on April 04, 2015 at 6:00 AM, updated?April 04, 2015 at 2:57 PMChildhood friends of Jaime Tinoco were first stunned when they heard the teenager was arrested for raping and beating a woman near Autzen Stadium in Eugene last year.This week, they again were shocked and saddened to learn that their former friend is?accused of killing?a 29-year-old woman in?Washington County's Cedar Mill?area.Tinoco, who turned 18 on Friday, faces charges of aggravated murder and unlawful use of a weapon in the Aug. 19 stabbing death of Nicole Laube. Investigators think he attacked the Forest Grove mother at random with the intent to rape her.The accusations are nothing like the boy Tinoco's friends used to know, they said during interviews with The Oregonian/OregonLive. But the changes they started to see in him mirrored what his?defense attorney said?about him in court during the Eugene case.Tinoco, the friends said, was a friendly kid, who came from a good, strong family. Some friends from middle school said he was outgoing. Others who knew him in high school said he was quiet, calm and shy."He was sweet; he was nice; he was respectful," said Erica Aguilar, who dated him in high school. "He was normal, I guess. Normal like any other kid, any other guy."But as he got older, his friends said, he started to mess up and never turned it around.At the time of the Sept. 13 rape in Eugene, Tinoco was on probation in Washington County for burglary, meth possession and harassment. He broke away from a supervised outing to a University of Oregon football game and committed the crime hours later.He was sentenced last month to 14 years in prison for the attack on the 39-year-old woman. In court, Tinoco's attorney said her client started smoking marijuana at 12 years old and later moved on to meth -- going on benders that lasted seven to 10 days. The drug use, she said, likely affected his brain.Records say he hadn't been enrolled at?Sunset High School?since April 2014. His attorney said that ninth grade was the last he completed.Before going to Sunset, Tinoco attended Tom McCall Upper Elementary School, Neil Armstrong Middle School, Forest Grove High School and the Community Alternative Learning Center, according to the?Forest Grove School District. He withdrew from the alternative school program in January 2013, said Connie Potter, a district spokeswoman. That school year he started at Sunset, the?Beaverton School District?said.At the time, his family, according to friends, moved from Cornelius to Washington County's?Cedar Mill area.Laube was killed 25 days before the rape occurred in Eugene. The two were strangers, authorities say. But the teen had lived with his parents at the?Evanbrook Apartments, across Northwest Barnes Road from the?Commons at Timber Creek, where Laube worked and was killed.Last week, a Eugene detective questioned Tinoco about Laube's death after his sentencing for the Eugene attack. Information gathered during the interview led to his arrest this week, authorities described. He was?charged Thursday afternoon?in?Washington County Circuit Court.When Iridian Gonzalez saw the photographs from Thursday's court hearing, she didn't see the boy she used to date at Neil Armstrong, she said. His hair was grown out and his facial hair was scruffy. His hands were cuffed to a belly chain and his ankles were shackled.She knew Tinoco, she said, as a respectful boy with a big smile who loved playing soccer."He was that sporty guy," she said.Gonzalez said they liked to watch movies and go to the Boys & Girls Club together after school to play foosball. She took him with her to youth group at St. Alexander Catholic Church in Cornelius."The first time I heard about the rape, I didn't believe it," the 18-year-old said. "I couldn't. I couldn't picture him doing that. When I heard about that, so many memories came to my mind."Gonzalez, who now lives in Yakima, Washington, said she last saw Tinoco during the summer, while she was at the Ape Caves with her family. She said Tinoco was on a field trip as part of a?Washington County Juvenile Department?program that attempted to help teens instead of sending them to jail. It was the same group he was with at the Ducks football game.Gonzalez said she dated Tinoco, who was a grade ahead of her, when she was in seventh grade and during part of her eighth-grade year. Things unraveled for him, she said, when he started hanging out with older guys. He moved from smoking pot to taking harder drugs, his friends said.Gonzalez said he also started to run away. His parents would go out looking for him, she said, and it was upsetting to see.His behavior prompted her to break up with him, Gonzalez said, and the two lost touch a few years back. But, for a while, they would still see each other around Cornelius.One time, after Gonzalez had started high school, she ran into Tinoco, and, initially, he didn't recognize her. His demeanor was oddly aggressive, she said. His mind seemed to be somewhere else. She hadn't seen him like that before.At Forest Grove High, Tinoco met Aguilar when he was a freshman and she was a sophomore, she said. They dated for about four months, starting in the middle of the year.She would go over to his house for barbecues and his parents would make dinner, she said. He was quiet and shy, and she often led their conversations."You couldn't really tell what was in his mind," said Aguilar, who is 19 and lives in Wilsonville.He had casual friends, she said, but wasn't close to many.At Forest Grove High, Tinoco started skipping school and getting into fights, she said. His mother would call Aguilar and ask if she had seen him.Because of the fights at school, Aguilar said, Tinoco started attending Forest Grove's Community Alternative Learning Center. The two soon lost contact.Tinoco has a younger sister and brother, about ages 14 and 8, respectively, Aguilar said. She has talked to his sister about his arrest and knows his family is hurting."They've always been there for him," she said. "I don't know what got into him. His family was great. It doesn't make sense."With Tinoco, she said, you couldn't tell if something was wrong. He never spoke of having a bad day, or being bothered by anything."I never thought anything was going on," Aguilar said. "Nothing showed."-- Rebecca Woolingtonrwoolington@503-294-4049;?@rwoolington???2015?.?All rights reserved. ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download