I would like to respond to some of the content in your posts.
He had a responsibility that day - a responsibility appropriate for a young man of his age. He was to watch his little brother and toddler sister. In addition to choosing drugs that day he chose to permit his friends inside the residence - according to him, many friends, in defiance of his mothers' wishes and what should have been common sense given the types he was associating with.
This was not the first time that James had been giving the responsibility of babysitting his brother and sister. He had done so many times before. With out any trouble what so ever. Given the working situation of his parents, looking after his siblings was common practice for James.
I do not believe that James wanted these "friends" to be there. Understanding the type of people they are, I can easily see how they were there anyway despite his (and his mothers') wishes. This may be reinforced by the testimony of the upstairs neighbor who said that James was in fact dissociating him self from the other kids.
I suspect in the same way James minimized the injuries to her sister - we know this because trial testimony is quite clear that the child had ongoing bleeding in at least three areas: the mouth, the vagina and the head, the head so badly that the attending nurse thought she was a redhead - he minimized the activities of his associates that afternoon.
Do you believe the was intentionally minimizing the activities of the perpetrators ? I most certainly do not. If I was in that situation of coming home to find my baby sister bleeding and in a state, I would at least try and clean her up and look after her, first and foremost. I would not leave her like that. I would think it rather poor of someone (especially given his age and not knowing any better, also at this point not knowing that she had in fact been raped) to leave her as she is.
If indeed he did not participate in the rape and beating, he certainly knew and possibly even endorsed what happened that afternoon - making him as guilty as anyone there.
If he had a consistent (with the evidence) and convincing story to tell, he would have been well served to tell that story however belatedly and at the risk of being harshly cross examined in the face of his previous lies.
I think he knew of the rape and beating his sister received. One would find that rather obvious with the state he found her in. That DOES NOT make him guilty though. Hell, even I know she got raped and beaten, just from reading the reports. That doesn't make ME guilty does it ?
You think he endorsed it ? How ? Why ? What evidence is there to support that ? Everything I see point so the contrary.
His story IS consistent, with the evidence, or complete lack of.
His two younger friends are more culpable as they surely took part and likely initiated the event.
Adam surely was involved to some extent and possibly other boys there that day as well.
Given their history I agree with you. Also especially given the fact that Adam admitted to police that when he was alone with the toddler, he took the girl's temperature with a rectal thermometer. For no reason.
Now to me, that really rings alarm bells. Yet why has all of this fallen on James ?
However the fact that James did not recieve the support of his mother and was implicated by his little brother is very damning. The fact that James lied about the event to police when they questioned him is also very damning - this is his baby sister. The fact that he chose to bath her ahead of calling for help given the condition we know she was in - per testimony referred to above, is very damning.
Such a terrible thing for a child to not have the support of his own mother. Though she has stated that she has her doubts about his guilt. Was even considering reconciling with James, though she never turned up.
Yes, he lied and he is guilty of that. Though, he is a child, WHAT child has never lied before. I know I'm guilty. Though the punishment of certain death and much worse in an adult prison; is that a fitting punishment for a child lying ? I think not.
Yes, she was bathed but from a loving brother reasoning; to clean her up ! It wasn't until then that it was determined she was raped and the call for help was made.
In fact, if he is guilty, why the hell did he even call for help at all
Even then that bathing was pretty poor as she was still covered when the examined her. I read (though for the life of me I can't find the source, so not sure how true) that they extracted DNA, though of course, not James'. Given the fact of the state she was in when she was examined, I would be very surprised if they didn't manage to find anything linking anyone.
Her big brother was the only person she could hope to recieve assistance from that day and he either disregarded her torment or he was as sadistic as the verdict suggests. Either way - justice has been served.
Completely disagree. She received all the assistance from James. As can be heard clearly in the 911 call both the girl AND James crying together and James holding her in his arms trying to comfort her. Do you possibly think if he had done this, the girl would allow James to do this ? Or would she be fighting him, pushing him away yelling 'No' like she was doing in the examination ?
However, there is no justification for James to have lied that day to police and no justification for not reaching out to emergency services immediately upon returning to his residence.
Fear of his parents reaction to allowing friends in the unit is not in the least credible given his past and ongoing poor behaviour. Obviously his parents were uncaring and unconvincing.
No, there is no justification for lying to the police, obviously in hindsight for James.
As I said, the first thing he did upon returning was tend to his sister. I would do the same.
William, I think what you don't realize here is that James him self is a CHILD. Children thing and do "silly" things as interpreted by an adult. Such as the fear of his parents reaction to this happening while on his watch. I applaud you if you were the perfect child and always had the mind of a grown adult, but for the most of us; unfortunately this is not the case.
For me the only reason for the way James acted the way he did was because he was complicit in the assault - one way or the other. Obviously, if he were an active participant his actions are easy to understand. Similarly, If he permitted or endorsed the assault on his sister - one would expect him to tailor his actions and statements that evening.
Why do you think this behaviour was justified?
William I don't believe that anyone here thinks that behavior is justified simply because nobody here believes that what you state was in fact what happened.
This leads me to my perspective on especially violent crime. My research into crime suggests that certain individuals are born with a defective set of genes. These individuals are referred to as sociopaths. Sociopaths are unable to empathize with a victims' suffering - it is because of this inherent lack of sensitivity that they are cabable of sometimes being unimaginably brutal or uncaring. I believe this is the case for James. In the best case scenario, he was simply unable to respond in an appropriate way to the viciousness inflicted upon his baby sister that afternoon. This does not make him any less guilty than his cohorts.
OK then William. How about we do something different. Why don't we turn the spotlight from James and point it on to you.
Now you talk of Sociopaths being unable to empathize with a victims' suffering.
Please do me a favor for a moment and consider this CHILD is completely Innocent. He did not commit this crime, there is nothing to prove he did, his mother has abandoned him and he has very little support from others. He knows he didn't do it. He has been locked up for the past two years and now as a child (and not a big one at that) is about to be thrown to the wolves in an adult prison. Considering the nature of why he is incarcerated and his lack of ability to defend him self; this child will be continually, viciously beaten, tortured, raped and killed. By that time he will have an ass hole the size of a clown's pocket.
A fate worse that what is sister went through. For what ? Something he didn't do ? Loving his sister ? Lying to police ? Effectively sentenced to worse than death, by the state, he knows it and there is nothing he can do about it. Completely helpless.
So, William, just for a moment, put your self in those shoes in the above situation. Put yourself in James' shoes. Put YOUR OWN SON in those shoes !
Will he be a victim, will he suffer ?
Do you emphasize with his situation ? Compassion ?
Then out of curiosity Mr Holder,
What does that make you ?
I'll leave you with a quote from James' cousin:
“The James I knew loved family above all else. He is not capable of committing such a crime. He would not do that to his sister, or anyone else. He does not have the mindset to do that.”
Sociopath ? Give me a break
P.S. Please, I mean no offense in the above post.