Teenager Freed in Killing Faces Robbery Charge

MIAMI, May 24 - Lionel Tate, the teenager sentenced to life in prison when he was 12 but freed when his conviction was overturned, was arrested Monday and accused of robbing a pizza deliveryman at gunpoint, the police said. It was his second arrest since his release in January 2004.

The police charged Mr. Tate with armed robbery after the deliveryman told them he had taken four pizzas to an apartment in Pembroke Pines and saw Mr. Tate hiding with a handgun behind the open door. The deliveryman, Walter Gallardo, said he dropped the pizza boxes and fled, only to be chased by Mr. Tate.

A 12-year-old boy who lives in the apartment told the authorities that he had let Mr. Tate, who was living nearby, use his phone to order the pizzas. Mr. Gallardo returned to the apartment complex with sheriff's deputies and identified Mr. Tate, who was among a group of people eating the abandoned pizzas, as his assailant.

"It's pretty airtight," said Elizabeth Calzadilla-Fiallo, a spokeswoman for the Broward County Sheriff's Office.

But James Lewis, a lawyer for Mr. Tate, who turned 18 in January, said the police charged him only because he was an easy target.

"He tells me that he absolutely robbed nobody, that he had no gun, that he had no altercation," Mr. Lewis said. "The cops came after it was all over and saw him with all the other fellows eating the pizza, and they assumed he was the guy."

Mr. Tate was convicted in 2001 of stomping and slamming Tiffany Eunick, 6, to death while she visited his home in 1999. He is believed to be the youngest American to receive a life sentence. His case became an international rallying point against treating juvenile offenders as harshly as adults.

Mr. Tate had served almost three years in prison when a state appeals court panel reversed his conviction on grounds that his mental competency should have been evaluated before his trial. He was released in January 2004, with the condition that he remain under house arrest for a year and on probation for 10 more.

In September, Mr. Tate was charged with violating house arrest after the authorities said they had found him outside late at night carrying a knife. But a Broward County Circuit Court judge decided against returning him to prison, instead adding five years to his probation.

Mr. Tate also faces a charge of armed burglary with a battery because the 12-year-old witness said Mr. Tate left the apartment after ordering the pizzas, then forced his way back in. He is being held without bail and is to be arraigned Wednesday. Mr. Lewis said his client realized the seriousness of the charges.

"If he had any involvement in this whatsoever, we all know what's going to happen," Mr. Lewis said. "Nobody is under any impression that the system will give him a second chance."



The system already gave him a second chance. Doesn't look like it did much good, did it? Armed robbery...just a trigger-pull away from murder. It means he would've been willing to kill the guy. So much for rehab.

Look, it seems that none of us really agree with each other. There are the pro-DP and con-DP folks. The pros generally seem to agree that something has to be done to protect society, and if a crime is so heinous that it warrants the ultimate penalty, then so be it. The cons generally seem to believe that all life is sacred and/or no one, even the state, has the right to put a person to death, no matter what the crime. Correct me if I'm wrong on this (I know y'all will), but that seems to be the basic premise of each side.

Ultimately, I believe that society must be protected. If it takes the death penalty to keep one person from killing however many others, then I'm all for the death penalty.

I'd be all for life imprisonment if 1.) it really meant LIFE imprisonment, and 2.) prisons were self-sufficient, without the amenities that law-abiding citizens don't even have (like cable, gyms, etc.). Let them grow their own food. Let them make their own clothes (we'll even give them the machines- they can plant cotton, then turn it into material, just like they did back in the day, only we'll give them the machines to do it with). Let 'em have tents and electrified fences. Their own little prison community. For LIFE. That would be fine by me--we could do away with the death penalty. Let them do each other if they choose.

But dammit, society should come first.


Sidhe

Thanks, Mr.Noodle...I feel the same way. We SHOULD be emotional over this kind of thing. When we stop being "emotional," we stop caring--at least until it happens to us. THEN we want "justice."


Catwoman: You're not going to change my mind, and I'm not going to change yours. I'm merely putting my opinion out here because I feel strongly about it. Welcome to Free America. If you don't like it, don't argue with it. I know how you feel, and you know how I feel. You're getting all flaky because I won't come around to your point of view. Not going to happen. I hold my beliefs as strongly as you hold yours, for reasons that, to me, are probably as strong as your reasons are to you. What makes you more right?

You are intent upon casting me as a "black or white" extremist, and that isn't the case, as you'd see if you'd read my earlier post. I'm not out there saying, "Screw the trial! Hang the bastard!" I'm merely saying that if the bastard is guilty, then hang him. Or let him come live with you. Either way suits me just fine.


Sidhe

I'm not going to get into the rest but when I was making dinner earlier I was one stabbing motion away from murder as well.

MrNoodle-->"depends on one's definitions of "extreme", "over the top", and "savage".

Someone who does something like that to a child should be subject to extreme justice, over-the-top measures to ensure he doesn't do it again, and savage consequences for repeat performances, yes. Gentlemanly codes of conduct work among gentlemen, but when the savages come to our place, they should be dealt with in kind.

I suppose it's best I don't hold public office, because I'm tired of the predators being handled with kid gloves and the prey lying out in the street forgotten. While we bicker over access to law books and cable TV for these bastards, the little kids are still DEAD."


Right on.:thumbsup:


xoxobruce: Once again, the voice of reason. You're pretty damned good at mediation, ya know that? :grouphug:


Sidhe

He's been married a couple of times. Survival training.

Wow....you mean they can be trained?? ;)

Well, luckily for you, killing poor defenseless critters isn't murder...and correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think it counts if they're already dead... :p

Bruce is very, very special.

Any guy who can be trained HAS to be...and I mean that in the BEST way, Bruce! :D

If I was really trainable I'd still be married. :fuse:

Brilliant. If he came to live with me, I'd handcuff him to the radiator and keep him talking until I work out what the fuck kind of mutation occurred in his neurotransmitters. Unlike you, what is most important to me is finding out the truth about life, and I ain't gonna go round destroying it until I know what I'm playing with.

1. An Englishman, an Irishman and a North American are about to buy a new car. They all have to travel 10 miles to work everyday. The Englishman buys a small hatchback that does 50 miles per gallon because it is economical. The American buys a year's subway pass to help save the environment. The Irishman buys a bicycle.

2. Who is right? Is it a matter of opinion, or point of view? Does it depend 'how you look at it'?

3. No. The Irishman is right, because his is the most sensible solution. You have more freedom on a bike, it keeps you fit, helps the environment, costs less etc etc.

4. The Englishman might say 'well, in my opinion, the car will cost less in the long term than a subway pass, and I can't ride a bike, so this is the best option. But what he really means is, this is the best option for me. Not the best option period.

5. There is always one overriding truth in any situation.

6. Opinions may be right, they may not. I'm not saying mine IS right, just that there is a right answer.

7. I want to try and find that right answer, and know I'm probably a long way off.

8. It's a shame that no one else cares about finding it.

But I accept that your opinion is more important to you than the truth. No hard feelings.

:worried: It's not me is it? I don't think I attack you personally... I don't mean to anyway. I actually think your posts are quite funny, unless you start talking about important stuff and then you get a bit confused. But I don't hold it against you. ;)

Ignoring people just decreases your exposure to things that push your buttons. Pushing your buttons is a good thing because it usually shows up something you need to work on. If someone says something that annoys me I immediately think 'ooh what's my problem here, why am I annoyed?' It's only for self benefit, no one elses!

And I'd just like to ditto everything jag said.

No, I'm not saying that all rulings in favor of the defendant are inaccurate. I'm saying that the defendant is rightly given all opportunity to be seen in a positive light (ie, you can't tell the jury that he's been convicted of assault in the past to prove that he's guilty of assault now--that can only be used in the penalty phase).

And as my mother was a legal secretary, and I grew up around lawyers and judges, I can say that most of the judges I knew had been lawyers before they became judges. Therefore, I'm presuming that they know the law and how it is applied.

But where did the 97% figure come from? Is that published somewhere?

Would it matter if it was?

The 97% came from my own experience... Having read every true crime book I can get my hands on, interacting with lawyers and judges and cops, working with criminals, and collecting true crime videos.

Or maybe I've just gotten only the ones that showed that, and they haven't sent me/haven't bought the ones that didn't....


Besides, even when I do give stats, it doesn't make a difference, so why bother looking them up when I can use my own experience, which I trust a hell of a lot more than some statistic I wasn't there to see made?