MovieChat Forums > We Need to Talk About Kevin (2011) Discussion > How could be possibly be released?

How could be possibly be released?

posted 8 years ago by bpjtuition
14 replies | jump to latest

One thing with this film really annoys me and insults my intelligence.

When the mother and Kevin have their final conversation in the prison meeting room she talks about him having a pending transfer to 'big school' i.e adult prison.

Kevin expresses serious concern for what will happen to him there. The mother then responds that he will probably get out early because of how he manipulated the jury and blamed the incident on prescription drug abuse.

This just seems utterly ridiculous. At best Kevin could possibly serve some of his sentence in an institution but there is NO WAY IN HELL he is going to make it out of his sentence. He murdered 10 students along with his own father and sister and he did it with premeditated brutality.

Unless the mother is trying to wind him up I find those comments really unbelievable.

[–] Chefeetaboopers 8 years ago

Welcome to the justice system. It's really messed up, and not just in America.

(See the movie "Perfect Sisters" or just read the book, since the movie adds in an abusive step-dad and teen angst that didn't actually exist in the real life trial) Canada tried two girls for only, like, 4 years. Their sentence got reduced and they were put into halfway houses and then got to change their identities and go to college and live new lives. They were 16 and 17 and killed their alcoholic single mother because they were poor and didn't like it and killed her for the life insurance and then ran around the school bragging about it and texted and IMed people about how cool they were for doing it.

My great uncle, who molested over 30 kids (2 who killed themselves not long after) including my mom and uncle and even tried going after my siblings and I, is about to be released permanently from prison, despite having been released on parole twice already and yet again molesting kids and bought back to prison. He only served, like, 10 years off and on. But, cause he's been "good" (how the hell would he be a pedo in prison thus act bad?) he's being released.

[–] RepublicofE 8 years ago

Well in the year 2016, if something like this happened then you're right, there's no way Kevin would ever see the light of day again unless he managed to convince the governor to commute his sentence (highly unlikely). But back when these school shootings were first starting to occur frequently, there were still some states where you couldn't sentence a minor to more than seven years no matter what they did. In the book's universe, Kevin's little stunt was actually one of those first few school massacres in the late 1990s that got a bunch of public attention, and thus he benefited from a juvenile justice code that wasn't yet up-to-date on the reality of teenagers committing heinous crimes with seemingly no reason or remorse. In the wake of school shootings and other such high-profile juvenile crimes, the states were quick to change their juvenile codes so that teenagers could be tried and sentenced as adults if the crime is severe enough (and in the book Eva mentions in passing a couple times that Kevin had directly influenced the national debate over how we treat juvenile offenders).

You're right that in the film it sounds like Eva is just being sardonic. But in the film they never indicate when it all takes place. In the book it turns out Kevin did his massacre just a couple weeks before the Columbine High School massacre (and deeply resented the Columbine shooters for stealing his thunder and taking the national spotlight away from him). In the book, Eva closes by revealing that Kevin would only do 5 years in the big house after transferring from juvie, which is a reality that was plausible back around that time, but in 2011 people wouldn't get that so they just changed it to a sardonic comment about how he might get lucky and have a judge or governor show mercy on him because he was just a drugged up teenager or whatever.

Something similar actually did happen in real life. Two middle-schoolers, aged 11 and 13, ambushed their classmates after pulling the fire alarm, killing four students and a teacher and wounding ten others. This was back in 1998, so they only got seven years each. After that the state legislature immediately updated their penal code to allow juveniles to be tried and sentenced as adults for murder.

[–] !!!deleted!!! (5819949) 8 years ago

Depends on the state really. Florida will max an 11 year old boy 25-life!

[–] Planikta 8 years ago

How does it insult your intelligence when (in real life) Mitchell Johnson and Andrew Golden who killed 5 people when they were aged 11 and 13 were both released upon turning 21, after serving 7 and 9 years? I don't think we know for a fact if he was put on trial as an adult or a juvenile, unless the fact that he's getting transferred to an adult prison when he turns 21 implies he was tried as an adult, I'm not familiar with American/New York State law.

In the end, it's also not a fact that he will get out "early", but simply something his mother believes, mostly because she knows he can manipulate authorities into thinking he's no longer a threat to society.

Also, the only sign of premeditation is the fact that he bought the locks for the doors in advance, so if this wasn't brought up at the trial, maybe the whole "premeditation" part was overlooked during sentencing. I mean, while he's clearly "different" throughout the movie, there's no obvious sign that he's about to go on a rampage and murder a dozen people including the only person who was always on his side, his father.

A case could be made that despite being "different", he had no intention to commit those murders before he witnessed his parents discussing divorce and custody and "snapped". Again, the fact that he bought all those locks before witnessing that discussion make that point moot, but the jury and the judge didn't watch the movie we watched, they had to make up their minds based on the information that was made available to them in court, which may or may not include where and when he got the locks.

My 2¢.

Also, prescription drugs he allegedly took (but was never seen taking during the movie) were blamed, while the popular opinion seems to put a lot of the blame on Eva, too. All in all, there are many little details that may add up and contribute to his getting an early release.

[–] bpjtuition 8 years ago

Andrew Golden and Mitchell Johnson are not good examples.

That happened at a time when school massacres were not in public consciousness and quite literally the justice system in their state didn't know what to do. They were tried as minors, and the law has subsequently been changed.

This case involves the brutal murder of a non abusive father and his very young sister, followed by a systematic massacre of nearly a dozen classmates in cold blood showing no remorse afterwards. Kevin was nearly 18 not 11 years old and this was meant to have happened in 1999.

It's like expecting me to believe that if Eric and Dylan had been arrested and not committed suicide that Dylan would stand a chance of release in his twenties. That's just nonsense.

If this was real life Kevin would be looking at the rest of his life behind bars or no consideration for release until he was well over 50.

[–] Planikta 8 years ago

You're probably right, I don't know much about American law and sentencing, and more specifically New York law, since I think it varies between states.

Then again, since 1999, there hasn't been a single school-shooting with 10+ deaths where the perpetrator(s) didn't die, adult or teen, so it's not like we can compare the sentencing in the movie with anything that happened in real life.

That said, Lionel Tate was sentenced to life for a single murder he committed when he was 12, so, again, you're probably right.

[–] RepublicofE 8 years ago

I don't know specifically about Colorado, but 17 is the age of legal adulthood in many states. Kevin was still 15 when he did his thing. In the book he was actually tried as an adult and had an adult felony record, it's just that due to his age they could only sentence him as a minor for some reason. Yes it sounds crazy, but criminal law often is rather schizophrenic in the US. I don't feel like looking up the New York juvenile code revision history to see if the book is historically accurate in that way, but I could totally believe that in 1999 some states still hadn't updated their juvenile codes to reflect the reality of school shootings and other heinous crimes by teenagers. Plus New York in particular has always been somewhat known for its "progressive" view on criminal justice with less emphasis on punishment (but then again they were also one of the first states to introduce harsher mandatory minimums as a result of the "super predator" thing as I understand, so I don't know).

[–] bpjtuition 8 years ago

I totally get all of that and you make good points about justice systems not being ready for crimes like this committed by people of that age.

However, this crime is so unbelievably way out in terms of pre meditation and violence that I just have to believe the public outrage over any suggestion of a release within five or so years would DEMAND that he remain incarcerated. Even with New York's progressive view on criminal justice, I think the best he would get is a 'sympathetic' sentence of maybe 25 years.

The best example I can give is that of Eric Smith who was only 12 when he brutally murdered four year old Derrick Roby. This took place in a New York suburb. Smith is incarcerated to this day having already served nearly 25 years. This was one single murder and it was in New York well before the school shooting phenomenon.

If Smith is anything to go by the implication that Kevin would be released in a few years after being transferred to an adult prison is for me a really weak aspect of the book and film. Nobody would give a damn if Kevin claimed he was out of it on anti depressants. The fact is he would almost certainly be spending the rest, or at least nearly all, of his life behind bars.

[–] RepublicofE 8 years ago

A judge wound't sentence Kevin to more than he was legally allowed to be sentenced because the sentence would immediately be overturned on appeal. So again, I don't know what the actual relevant statute and sentencing guidelines were in 1999 in New York, but if the law said he could only be sentenced to seven years then it would be seven years and not a day longer. If you'll recall, Eva evan mentioned in the book that Kevin took pride in getting so much attention for his little stunt that he was directly influencing the debate over juvenile justice in the book's universe, even the debate over capital punishment for juveniles.

They could possibly try and find a loophole and bring him up on federal terrorism charges or something, but that wouldn't likely stick. Depending on what the actual law was (again, I don't feel like looking it up right now), he may also have had a long period of electronic monitoring or house arrest as a condition of his release. Also, given his prior history and notoriety, you can bet that the minute he broke the law again in any way shape or form, he would be given the maximum sentence possible, and adult sentences can be a lot harsher even for comparatively "minor" crimes.

May little fan theory for after the end of the book is that Eva and Kevin actually do move to France or someplace like Eva always wanted, since Kevin would likely be the target of vigilante violence for at least the next couple decades of his life.

[–] bpjtuition 8 years ago

In New York in 1999 the maximum penalty for a juvenile was nine years to life so Kevin would definitely have gotten the maximum sentence.

I've been looking at legal files and the Eric Smith case is not even a one off, there are at least 13 men now incarcerated whom were sentenced to nine years to life between 1993 and 2001.

Whatever way you look at it there's no way in hell Kevin is getting out anytime soon.

You also have to factor in Kevin's mindset; he clearly shows that he wanted infamy, his massacre showed massive pre meditation Prozac or not, the murders were especially sadistic and his younger sister was just a child.

[–] RepublicofE 8 years ago

He could still theoretically be paroled in 2024 due to recent SCOTUS decisions. Though the chances of him getting paroled on the first attempt aren't great, since like you said his crime was about as premeditated as they come. Brenda Ann Spencer has been trying since the 1990s.

So assuming you're right about the criminal statue, then I agree that kind of weakens the ending. I guess the author was attempting to finish on an optimistic note, but to me the chance of Kevin and Eva beginning to reconcile their relationship was an optimistic note enough.

Still, his early release is perhaps central to the plot. My interpretation of the story is that his all-encompassing motive for doing what he did was his Oedipus complex, and the hope, realistic or delusional, that he and Eva could be together in the aftermath.

[–] recklesscow 8 years ago

In the book (it's been awhile since I've seen the film), Kevin was a few days of 16th birthday and it mentions 16 is the cut off date for trying minors as adults, so Kevin calculated his act around that. He goes on Prozac in the book as insurance to have a defense during his trial, and he and his lawyer instill enough doubt about the culpability of the drug making him act different that he only gets a sentence of 7 years.

[–] RepublicofE 7 years ago

I don't recall the book specifically mentioning Prozac as the reason for his light sentence. His lawyer did bring it up, but he didn't really need to since, according to the book, he already could only be sentenced to 7 years due to his age and his age alone.

Saying he got only 7 years cause he was on Prozac would reflect a very poor understanding of how the law works on the part of the author. The evidentiary standard for an insanity defense has been pretty steep since at least the 1980s. You can't just murder 11 people in cold blood and avoid 25-life just because you were a depressed kid on antidepressants, and that was no less the case in 1999. The side effects of the meds would have to be so severe that they completely compromise your free will, negate premeditation, and greatly diminish your criminal culpability, and even then there's no guarantee your defense will be accepted (and even if it is, someone like Kevin could then look forward to spending at least the next couple decades of his life in a psychiatric facility that could end up being even worse than maximum security prison).

It is still somewhat plausible that, depending on the jurisdiction, a teenage mass murderer could get a lighter sentence based solely on his age in the 1990s, but if the OP is to be believed that wound't apply to New York in 1999. And today, it would be virtually impossible without some kind of executive clemency.

[–] KomikBookGeek 7 years ago

Kevin didn't blame 'prescription drug abuse' - a (very rare) side effect is maina. He blamed proper psychological therapy. And because there is a lot of misinformation about psych meds, plus Kevin having a personality disorder and being very superficially charming and good at acting, the jury believed him to be guilty of something less than premeditated murder.

He was in prison - for juveniles - and will soon go to adult prison, not an institution. It's not ridiculous, but it probably wouldn't happen today. Though despite what has been said here, the age of majority - the legal age of adulthood - in the USA is eighteen. A minor can be tried as an adult, but they are still minors until the age of eighteen.