Putting the defendant in jail for life is, simply put, a violation of the Eighth Amendment - cruel and unjust punishment.
King Brothers Case
This case followed directly on the heels of the Tate case, but provides less of a defense to the children here. It is undisputed that the children knew what they were doing when they helped to murder their father. Unlike the Tate case, there is no debate about mens rea, or actual guilt in the crime.
As a defense attorney, however, I would focus the children's defense on the fact that the sentencing of life in prison is unconstitutional given the Eighth Amendment's bar against cruel and unjust punishment.
The children were exceedingly young, and under the influence of child molester and...
As a result, their situation is extraordinary in its circumstances, and even though a prison sentence is appropriate, a mitigated sentence with much of the sentence being served out in a juvenile detentional facility would be a much more appropriate sentencing.
There is much opportunity in this case for rehabilitation in these youth. For the adult male being tried, however, there is little opportunity for rehabilitation - as a previous sex offender and now a murder, he has no option but to serve life in prison for his actions.
It is, however, manifestly cruel and unjust to throw the children, under such duress and rough family conditions, into jail for life and waste young lives given the fact that rehabilitation is most definitely possible.
