‘Good Kids’ Who Kill--Violent ‘80s to Blame?

The bailiff unfolded a paper napkin, glanced at both sides and placed it on a table in front of a boy seated in the Sylmar courtroom of Los Angeles Juvenile Commissioner Michael G. Price.

The youngster picked up the napkin and wiped his eyes. A slightly built youth whose gray sweat shirt hung loosely around his narrow shoulders, Mark was accused in a juvenile petition of second-degree murder in the Feb. 22 shooting of a friend in Mark’s North Hollywood home.

The arraignment hearing was held last Tuesday, 16 days after the accused youth’s 13th birthday.

A Good Student

Police, the prosecutor and the child’s attorney say the tragic nature of the crime is compounded by Mark’s age and the fact that he apparently comes from a good home. The son of a Burbank dentist, he was a good student. He was the president of his elementary school class and had no history of delinquent behavior.

During the past 13 months there has been one other homicide in greater Los Angeles involving a 12-year-old boy. In another incident, a 13-year-old in Canoga Park shot and seriously wounded a 14-year-old friend. Because of their ages, the last names of the assailants have been withheld.

Like Mark, neither of the boys involved in these shootings was from a broken home. They did not live in high-crime neighborhoods and they were not affiliated with youth gangs.

They were considered good kids whose lives suddenly and inexplicably turned violent. And in each case police, prosecutors, families and friends could only wonder why.

Age Level Dropping

“It used to be that the kids coming to us after getting involved in violent crimes were all 16 and 17,” said Bob Medina, head of the Los Angeles County Probation Department’s gang unit. “But the age level is dropping to around 10, 11.”

Medina, whose unit refers juveniles convicted of violent crimes to counseling agencies and correctional facilities, said he is not surprised that youngsters from good homes occasionally commit violent acts.

“Kids watch “Starsky and Hutch” and then turn on the news and see police and bombings and shootings and they wonder, ‘What is real and what isn’t?’ ” Medina said.

“It used to be kids growing up in rural settings, who had values and work ethics and a good family situation, were different from kids growing up in the city. But no more.

“A kid growing up in Lancaster or the San Joaquin Valley now gets exposed to the same things as the kid in Pacoima and Van Nuys.”

Sheila Fulton, executive director of the Juvenile Justice Connection Project, said, “There’s an increase in violence and drug abuse throughout society, among the adult population. Why should we believe it would be different among children, which is our weakest link?”

Homicide statistics on shootings involving youths 14 and younger are difficult to interpret because reporting agencies use different criteria and age breakdowns. Coroner’s statistics tabulate fatal shootings according to the age of the victim and do not always show the age of the perpetrator. Figures compiled by prosecutorial agencies can also be misleading because in many homicides there is insufficient evidence to file criminal charges.

109 Youths Slain

A study by the National Health Center in Maryland showed that in 1983--the latest year for which figures are available--109 youths between the ages of 10 and 14 were victims of gun-related homicides in the United States.

Health center statistics for 1983 also show there were 158 deaths blamed on accidental shootings involving youths in the same age bracket.

Peter Greenwood, a specialist in juvenile crime with the Rand Corp. in Santa Monica, said there have been too few studies aimed at determining whether youths under 14 are mature enough to comprehend death and the seriousness of committing a homicide, even though it’s a “very hot topic.”

The law requires that police investigating homicides by youths under 14 first question the youngsters to determine whether they can distinguish between right and wrong. The prosecutor must do the same, so suspects are usually evaluated by probation officers before their initial appearance in Juvenile Court.

History of Abuse

Mike Crackovanner, a director with VisionQuest, a nationwide private agency that provides counseling for violent juvenile offenders, said most homicides committed by those under 14 are either gang shootings or family feuds. Many of the offenders have been physically or sexually abused in the home, he added.

The younger the offender, the less likely he or she will be a repeat offender, Crackovanner said. “Again, that ties into the crimes of passion thing,” he added.

Greenwood said killings such as the recent San Fernando Valley shootings are “extremely rare.” What’s more, the youngsters had no history of delinquency and apparently came from stable homes.

The first of the shootings happened in February, 1985, in the attractive, desert community of Quartz Hill, near Lancaster. Three 12-year-old boys gathered in one boy’s bedroom to lift weights. They planned to visit a nearby video arcade afterward.

Police said the three youths were leaving the room when one of them, Christopher Perea, picked up a baseball another of the boys had been awarded while playing for a Little League team. When Christopher refused to give it back and began walking downstairs, police said, one of the other boys stood on a balcony at the top of the staircase and began firing a .22-caliber rifle his father had given him just a few days earlier.

Pulled Trigger 15 Times

The third boy called police. Christopher was dead on arrival at a nearby hospital. An autopsy revealed that Christopher was struck at least 15 times by bullets fired from the semiautomatic rifle. The bullets inflicted 22 entrance and exit wounds, according to the coroner’s report.

The boy who shot Christopher was charged with murder and eventually pleaded guilty to second-degree murder, according to his attorney, Bob Zeller. He was sentenced to the California Youth Authority for a term not to exceed his 25th birthday.

“The kid had no history of violence and was never in trouble before,” Zeller said. “The kid had never shot a gun in his life, except for a BB gun. I don’t believe he was old enough to realize just what he was doing. He was basically taunted into doing it.

“I had five defenses I was going to try out,” Zeller said. “But I kept getting back to: ‘Yeah. But how are you going to get around 22 bullet holes in the kid’s body?’ ”

Russian Roulette

The following June, a 13-year-old Canoga Park boy was arrested on suspicion of attempted murder when he used his father’s .38-caliber revolver to shoot a 14-year-old classmate during a game of Russian roulette. Police said the boy first fired the gun at himself before pointing the weapon at his friend, Dwayne McKee, of Woodland Hills.

Dwayne saw the bullet in the gun’s cylinder and tried to duck, police said. But his companion fired anyway. The bullet tore through Dwayne’s cheek, shoulder and spinal cord. He remains paralyzed from the neck down.

The boy who pulled the trigger was eventually convicted of assault with a deadly weapon and allowed to return home after a sentence to a youth camp was stayed by a juvenile court commissioner.

Deputy Dist. Atty. Nancy A. Lidamore, prosecutor in both the Quartz Hill and Canoga Park cases, said she thinks that the boy who killed his friend over a baseball sincerely believed that the threatened loss of a prized ball justified firing at least 15 rounds into his friend.

“He thought he had every right to use that kind of force,” Lidamore said.

Unanswered Questions

But the Canoga Park shooting left her filled with doubts. Although she said she believes the boy intended to fire the shot, Lidamore does not understand the motive. “In that particular case, I’ll never know,” Lidamore said. “That case puzzles me, to this day.”

The North Hollywood shooting was equally puzzling. Police said Mark’s parents were vacationing in Las Vegas and left Mark and two other children in the care of a 21-year-old daughter. Mark and Justin Newsome, 12, were in the parents’ bedroom, playing with five rifles, two shotguns and a .22-caliber revolver Mark’s father kept unloaded in separate gun cases.

Investigators said the two had an argument during which Justin pointed an unloaded shotgun at Mark and clicked the trigger several times. Mark then loaded the revolver, police said, and fired one shot that struck Justin in the upper body. The boy was dead when paramedics, called by the older sister, arrived a few minutes later.

Neither Mark’s or Justin’s parents would talk about the shooting.

Shooting Called Accidental

Mark’s arraignment last week lasted about 10 minutes. The boy’s attorney, Barry King, said the shooting was accidental and not characteristic of the boy’s behavior.

“He had not had one contact with the police,” King said, and was an outstanding student. King said he believed the shooting was accidental.

Deputy Dist. Atty. Jerry Bowes disagreed.

“The facts do not indicate an accidental shooting,” Bowes said. “It was intended, although perhaps impulsively.”

The boy’s behavior may, indeed, have been uncharacteristic. “But there was at least some reflection of a lack of self-control and recklessness,” Commissioner Price said.

Price ruled that the youngster remain in custody until a detention hearing later this week. His trial is scheduled for March 18.

During the arraignment hearing, a bailiff walked to where Mark was sitting and tapped him on the shoulder. The hem of Mark’s blue pants fell down around his Razorback tennis shoes as he rose from the chair. Dwarfed by the uniformed guard, Mark cried as he walked out of the room and returned to Sylmar Juvenile Hall.

Justin was buried the next morning.