Protecting the identity of a minor?

i dont think that it would do anything about the crime rate by minors but i do think if a minor commits a serious crime like this the community does have a right to know they could get out on bond and harm someone else

Yes yes yes! Sometimes the media reports something about "a 17-year-old MAN" (emphasis mine) which is ridiculous, but in cases like this, they're stymied by The Law (and we know what Shakespeare said about THAT). There is a certain element of young thugs who are smug in the fact that they can't be identified, so push the limits. When Steven Truscott was (wrongfully) convicted of murder and sentenced to hang, he was only 14. Now, I'm not saying the "kids" in this case should be sentenced to hang, but they shouldn't be coddled either. At the very least, they should be identified, especially as, as you stated, a large number of people already know who they are. (Wow! Wasn't expecting to rant so early in the day.)

I live in Toronto so I familiar with the case you are talking about. I believe they should be identified at15 an 17 you know what you are doing is wrong, they also know they can get away with it. Perhaps if the child was under 10 I might see a reason to not identify them but anything over ten should be in my opinion. I truly hope they try them as adults both of them. We seriously need to change the young offenders act in Canada, as so many kids are killing kids don't you agree.

I think the age limit shoud be changed to 16 for minors committing murder. I do not think it will deter anything as if it is in a person to kill they will kill. Hopefully the court system will try them as adults as that can and often is done. At 17, I see no reason to protect them from the adult system as they are practically adults already. Then again many 17 years olds are as nieve as say 12 year olds. It is a hard subject. I do hope the facebook discussions will not change the outcome of the trials against these murderous teens. And remember they are innocent until proven guilty. This is what many fear in teen cases. What if they are innocent and an adult really commited the crime? Another hard to deal with scenario.

well i think those guys identity should definately be revealed since they did a crime for which they should be punished and be exposed to the media.so that it can be set as an example for those minors who do this kind of crimes in their minor age or might be if they are being forced to do so.they are just to be adult so i really dont find any reason to hide thier identity.and the worst tihng is that they did not do any small mistakes for which they could be lfet,they are murderers,who should be punished by all means.i mean was that igrls fault so much that they got the right ot take her life ?????who are they to take a life ?????

I have always thought they should be identified. They know what they are doing....why should they be protected....that child was not protected when she was being murdered. What a sin...it makes me so made to hear about youth crime...we had something like this here in halifax, the girl i think she was 16 was beaten for hours, tormented, burned with cigerrates, and the two that did it have been arrested but they are being protected under the act....makes me mad.

Disclosing the name's don't make any difference in the crime rates with minors. I don't necessarily agree that their names should be given out, because there's people out there, who, when they disapprove of something you've done, or are doing, they will personally do something to ensure that it doesn't happen again. The Youth Criminal Justice Act is the way it is to protect minors from being from publicity, this gives them a better chance to rehabilitate and change, improve or grow up. The less their names are said the better chance they have. NOW, I'm not saying they don't deserve punishment for what they did and they don't deserve time. But by not sharing their names with the world they're given a second chance. Which I believe isnt necessarily fair because if names weren't disclosed of adults who commit the same crimes, they might have a chance to rehabilitate. The only exception to this rule is if the minor is transferred to adult court and tried as an adult. Or something along those lines.

They've been *arrested* for the crime. That does not mean that they *committed* the crime, although one would hope that the police wouldn't have arrested them without strong evidence of their guilt. So until such time as they've been convicted, their identities should be protected.

I don't think itentifing minors would make any difference. Killers don't really care. I have no clue why minors aren't identified if they commit a major crime. Shoplifting is on a different scale to murder.