Thread: Eight year old boy a 'serial killer'

Originally Posted by Tronic

wow... the world is one messed up place... wonder what type of a sentence can be handed to a 8 year old kid, wait, "serial killer".

I have never heard of such a thing before. What possible sentence can be applied to a child?

Medical experts’ opinions state that the boy might be suffering from what is known as “conduct disorder”, a mental state wherein a patient feels a sense of gratification after inflicting injuries on others.

Nand Kumar, a psychotherapist with the All India Institute of Medical Sciences, said: “Such cases need immediate medical intervention. Doctors need to address the chemical imbalance in patients’ brains.”

Kumar added that while such cases are not rare, the intensity of Samarjit’s action was a “dangerous” symptom.

“Such aggression may be hereditary and may be caused because of great chemical upheavals in the brain.”

Begusarai superintendent of police Amit Lodha said: “After completing the preliminary formalities we have handed the matter to the court. We will hear from the court, who will be responsible for providing medical assistance to the accused.”

Lodha added, “We will also request the court to provide a separate ward for this boy so that he does not harm other juvenile delinquents staying at Begusarai remand home.”

The Telegraph - Calcutta : Jamshedpur

Ok, so for now the boy is in a remand home; and as now he will go through this medical treatment; wonder if these murders still count as what? first-degree? second-degree?; since as per the doctors, he wasnt in a proper mental state...



PS: btw, the reason of different names given to the child by different sources is due to him being underage i think; to protect his identity.

Some people consider either seven or eight to be the "age of reason", that is the age at which you can determine right from wrong and so be held accountable for your actions. His first transgression at least seems to fall before this time. Modern societies seem to hold the age at which you can be tried as an adult higher than eight years. I wonder how this will play out, are the parents going to be held responsible?

Removing, strangling and smashing another with a brick is brutal for an 8 year old and killing when he was 7 is very disturbing. I would love to read the psychological findings on this child and when his tendencies started to show. It was long before the point of age 7 when he killed the first time. Which leads me to wonder - who wasn't looking at this kid and why? Were the parents even around? Who was looking after this kid? The uncle is quoted in the article, was he the guardian? Too many unanswered questions in order to really form an opinion of responsibility.

While I do agree that at some point children do recognize right from wrong, they need to be instructed what is right and what is wrong first in order to recognize the difference. It appears to me, this kid slipped through the cracks somewhere along the line.

Seriously, not that its not his fault or anything, but where the hell were the parents/uncles/etc??

It is at least partially their fault. Out-effing-rageous.

Originally Posted by Stan187

It is at least partially their fault. Out-effing-rageous.

Not partially, but it is fully their fault, since they were totally aware of the previous murders commited by the boy and still let him run loose...

Originally Posted by Tronic

Not partially, but it is fully their fault, since they were totally aware of the previous murders commited by the boy and still let him run loose...

Good point Troic.. Why was'nt he put into care after the first "murder"? or the second? No, he was allowed to kill once again. Lots and lots of questions have to be asked in this case

Dunno, he smashed her head with a brick. That denotes rage, but then he strangled her which demonstrates predetermination. Then he buried her which shows knowledge of his actions and knowledge of right and wrong.
Then it turns out he's done it before. Twice, with the families knowledge.
His age at this point is immaterial. Whatever made him this way, he's now a monster by any definition. He needs to be locked away for good, as does his family for concealing the previous murders. Two children are dead because of their actions.

I cannot help feeling as though charges should also be brought against the family members that knew about him killing his 6 month old sister and cousin for not doing something to get him help and keep him away from others at that time.

The family should be charged as accessories to murder after the fact because they knew that he at least committed a murder before and didn't do anything to stop him from committing another murder.

Bastards. They should be hanged.

Per reports, his parents are poor labourers who have fled the village after this kid murdered the girl. Some wag reporter asked these chaps: "why didnt you show him to a pyschiatrist"- as if they had the money.

Well what a sorry story and reading this makes, three deaths, between the ages of 6-8, what a very disturbed young man, and to go and tell someone after he`s done it, i just sick, so the question is, what is to be done with the boy, well I know what I would do, but it would probably upset a lot of you, so I will keep it to myself, suffice to say, it wouldn`t invovle putting him into care,

he shold be euthanised like mad dog, along with his uncle who covered up previous murders, never mind the age, he deserves death.

As much as it sounds harsh, I agree with Omon here, no to locking people like this away and wasting thousands upon thousands of dollars to feed and house them when there is no chance for them to redeem their place in society. To the guillotine with these a-holes, I don't care how old. As Parihaka said, if the little **** didn't know the difference between right and wrong, he wouldn't have tried to cover up the body after the fact.