back to article Boy, 16, cuffed after posting selfie with body of kid he allegedly killed

A western Pennsylvania teenager has been charged with homicide and firearms offenses after he uploaded an image to the Snapchat messaging service of himself posing with the dead body of a classmate he allegedly shot and killed. According to a report in the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, Reuters, and others, 16-year-old Maxwell …

  1. stephajn

    I wonder...

    ...if since he is being tried as an adult with first degree murder, if the death penalty will apply. It seems Pennsylvania does have it there.

    Death penalty or not, I'm glad that they are trying him as an adult and not a minor so that he can hide behind being under 18.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Insanity plea

      Should be a good case for it, because what sane criminal would brag to friends about committing murder and send them evidence? It may or may not stick, but if he can't plead insanity it'll surely be plea bargained down to life in prison.

      1. Mark 65

        Re: Insanity plea

        Never attribute to insanity that which can adequately be explained by a complete lack of intelligence.

    2. Jess

      Re: I wonder... Darwin Award?

      It would seem likely that he will get at least life without parole.

      That could arguably make him eligible for a Darwin award, anyway.

  2. Mark 85

    Inadmissable...

    I'll lay odds his lawyer tries to get the court to exclude that photo as it was supposed be deleted....

    And it's good he's being tried as an adult... as a minor he would have a "get out of jail, free" card when turns 21. *That is, if the jury finds him guilty.... we have to remember that he's innocent until proven guilty.

    Edit: * Added disclaimer.

    1. Neoc

      Re: Inadmissable...

      "...exclude that photo as it was supposed be deleted..."

      Mmmm.... might have had a chance if the Police had gotten the photo from SnapChat (except that SnapChat has already admitted that there were ways for LEOs to get at the photos). In this case, however, the *recipient* of the picture saved the photo. Hence there is no hanky-panky on the part of either the LEOs or SnapChat.

      Although I can see SnapChat being subsequently sued by the defendant for allowing a hole in their software by which the recipient could save the photo.

      Disclaimer: I am neither a Lawyer nor an American, so my opinions on US laws are probably badly informed.

      1. LaeMing
        Facepalm

        Re: Inadmissable...

        I imagine the 'hole' is not in their software, but part of the screen-shot ability inherent in most OSes since there where screens to screen-shoot.

        (Icon for snapchat users, not poster I am responding to).

        1. Jedit Silver badge

          "I imagine the 'hole' is not in their software, but part of the screen-shot ability "

          The significant hole was in the kid this psycho shot.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        FAIL

        Re: Inadmissable...

        The kid who got the SnapChat message did a screenshot and as a side note, SnapChat even notifies the sender that a screenshot of the photo was done so he can't say he didn't know what happened to it. [It's nice to see the old aphorism still holds: More criminals talk their way into prison....]

      3. John Tserkezis

        Re: Inadmissable...

        "might have had a chance if the Police had gotten the photo from SnapChat"

        From another report, turns out he sent the photo to a number of "friends", one of which saved it before passing it on.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Holmes

          Re: Inadmissable...

          Doesn't matter much now if the photo is inadmissable. They have a confession. Lawyers would have to go after the confession if they wanted to mount a defense.

          1. Sarah Balfour

            Re: Inadmissable...

            We don't know how that confession was obtained - could have had his dick in a vice (metaphorically speaking, although this IS America…) and, as nobody's yet mentioned it, the kid's black. US LEOs seem to have a penchant for attempting to stitch up blacks (when they're not murdering them, of course).

            Perhaps he IS guilty - or, perhaps, this is Zimmerman in reverse; why guy definitely shoots black kid and walks, forensics state that this black kid DID NOT kill his mate (ethnicity unknown), but I have no faith in him,getting a fair trial, for the same reasons that Trayvon Martin's family didn't get justice - US fuzz are inherently racist.

            I read a statistic somewhere (and I'll find out where when I'm more alive) that blacks make up 80% of death row inmates, but blacks aren't responsible for 80% of capital offences.

            Am I saying our plod ain't racist cunts - of COURSE I'm not, but we don't legally murder people here anymore.

            If the victim was white, there's no fucking chance in hades this kid's gonna get a fair trial. Surprised the fuzz who arrested him didn't shoot him on sight, save the expense of going to court.

            Go on then, downvote away…

    2. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

      Re: Inadmissable...

      Irrelevant whether the photo was saved or not. The recipient saw it and can testify to that.

  3. poopypants

    A scary reminder

    that the veneer of civilisation is thin.

    1. Michael Thibault

      Re: A scary reminder

      >that the veneer of civilisation is thin.

      Pa-pair theen?

      If you can't be famous for 15 minutes, your only option is to be infamous for 15 milliseconds.

      1. AbelSoul

        Re: Pa-pair theen?

        Waff-air theen?

  4. westlake

    No Death Penalty.

    In March 2005, the United States Supreme Court ruled that the death penalty for those who had committed their crimes at under 18 years of age was cruel and unusual punishment and hence barred by the Constitution.

    http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/juveniles-and-death-penalty

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: No Death Penalty.

      No, because shooting someone in the face isnt cruel or unusual at all.

      The best thing we can do is firstly, lock *it up for life, neuter it (just in case!) then explain that being told to "toss the salad" does not mean it has a cushy job in the kitchen.

      Little scuzz bucket whom is not fit to breath the same air as the rest of us in civilised society.

      *no apologies for de-humanising it. It wasn't human to start with. It is a feral animal. Nothing more, nothing less.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: under 18 years of age was cruel and unusual punishment

      "Happy 18th birthday son!

      You can now legally get married, gamble, drink alcohol and - best of all - be revenge-murdered by the state.

      Yesterday that would have been cruel and unusual but it's OK from today."

      1. Michael Wojcik Silver badge

        Re: under 18 years of age was cruel and unusual punishment

        Happy 18th birthday son!

        You can now legally get married, gamble, drink alcohol and - best of all - be revenge-murdered by the state.

        Legal drinking age1 is 21 in the US. But 18's the age at which you can legally buy tobacco products, so there's that.

        1Actually, it's the age at which you can legally purchase alcohol or possess it in public. And even that's a hodgepodge of state laws passed under the threat of losing part of their Federal highway funding.

  5. Winkypop Silver badge
    Unhappy

    Guns eh

    I wonder how often a gun is illegally or inappropriately fired in the USA every day.

    It would make a sombre mash-up as little red pins popping up on an online map.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Guns eh

      Well mass shootings are here:

      http://www.stoptheshootings.org/

  6. The Vociferous Time Waster

    Oh well

    we're not losing a future Einstein here are we

    1. werdsmith Silver badge

      Re: Oh well

      Stupid is the new smart. Innit.

    2. ukgnome

      Re: Oh well

      No, but the kid with a hole in his face might of been.

      Still I guess it's OK to be flippant as it didn't happen to you or yours right.

      prick

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Oh well

        No, but the kid with a hole in his face might HAVE been.

        TFTFY FFS.

        -1 for the inability to speak your native language. There are protozoa who know the difference between "have" and "of".

  7. chivo243 Silver badge
    Holmes

    Insert Forrest Gump's famous line here....

    Stupid is as stupid does. It's a shame our children are killing each other. I thought we were past the crusades?

  8. Anonymous Coward
    Facepalm

    Just when you think people can't plumb new depths of stupid

    Along comes this candidate for the Darwin Award to prove people are always striving for peak stupidity!

  9. PeteA
    Facepalm

    Darwin Award contender?

    If he gets the death penalty, surely this has to be considered for the Darwin awards?

    1. Pen-y-gors

      Re: Darwin Award contender?

      Even without the death penalty, if he spends the rest of his short life locked up in a Merkin chokey, when would he get the chance to pass on his DNA?

  10. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    yet another proof

    unrestricted access to private communications by UK intelligence services is essential! - proclaims Ms May

  11. Peshman

    Dumbass!

    That is all.

  12. phil dude
    Unhappy

    parents...

    The most notable thing here is the MOTHER turned her son in, on seeing the photo.

    That might be self-preservation (would you want a killer in your house?), but it does show an adult response to an horrific event.

    P.

    1. manarth

      Re: parents...

      "The recipient of the image…saved it to his phone…When his mother discovered it on the device, she contacted police."

      The phrasing is a little convoluted, but it sounds like alleged killer messaged his mate, his mate's mum dossed him in.

      1. diodesign (Written by Reg staff) Silver badge

        Re: Re: parents...

        "a little convoluted"

        Deliberately so – this is all we know at this point, and didn't want to make stuff up or guess what happened.

        C.

    2. skeptical i

      Re: parents...

      Hi, Phil: I read this as the cops were called by the mum of the friend who received the piccie, not by the perp's mum.

  13. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    but, there's laws against that sort of thing!

    and now, thanks to social media, people who commit violence for attention, will see another of their ilk getting mention he'd never receive had he been a decent bloke.

    Lots o' sickos out there. Not all of them find a politically correct reason to attach their violent tendencies to.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like