13-year-old murder defendant faces U.S. appeal court

A panel of U.S. judges will consider this week whether a 13-year-old boy accused of slaying his father's fiance should be tried as an adult and therefore face a possible life sentence.

Pennsylvania's Superior Court is considering an appeal by defence lawyers, who want the teen, Jordan Brown, to be sent to a juvenile facility rather than face imprisonment without parole as an adult.

Emotions were high ahead of Tuesday's hearing, given the horrific nature of the crime and the broader legal implications that the three-judge panel must consider in the case.

Brown was just 11, a chubby schoolboy, when he allegedly shot Kenzie Houk, then eight months pregnant, in the back of the head in February 2009 in her rural home northwest of Pittsburgh.

Prosecutors allege the boy waited until his father left for work that Friday morning before entering Houk's bedroom and shooting her with a 20-gauge shotgun.

After that, prosecutors say, he went to school, dropping the spent cartridge outside and leaving Houk's daughter, aged four, to discover the grisly scene.

Last year, a local judge ruled that Brown, by then 13, should stand trial as an adult for what is being considered the double murder of Houk and her near full-term baby son.

In the two years since the crime, Brown has been in custody and the case has drawn attention to on how children are handled in the American criminal justice system.

Amnesty International has been prominent in campaigning to overturn the judge's ruling, saying it is "deeply disturbed" by the fact that Brown would, if convicted, never be free again.

However, under Pennsylvania law, a serious crime like a homicide is initially filed in criminal court unless the defence can make a case for sending it to the juvenile system.

In criminal court, Brown would be tried as an adult, whereas in juvenile court he would be tried as a minor and win release at 21, supposedly after rehabilitation.

(Published by Edmonton Journal - January 25, 2011)