Teens, Romance, and Murder in Wylie High School

[Soldati Senza Confini]

A Collin County judge ruled Friday that Brenden Bridges, one of the teens accused in the murder of a Wylie high school student, will be tried as an adult.

Police say Bridges and a friend killed 17-year-old Wylie East High School student Ivan Mejia in March over a girl.

Bridges and the other suspect lured Mejia behind Wylie East High and strangled him, investigators say.

The judge's decision on Friday came after a week of intense and emotional testimony.

Prosecutors argued Mejia's death was cold-blooded, premeditated, physical and done without remorse. They also pointed out that Bridges turned 17 just four days after the crime.

It was revealed during the hearing that Bridges told mutual friends, "I want Ivan out of the way so I can be with her. You don't understand, sometimes I want to kill him,” and "It would be easier if Ivan was out of the picture. Ivan is dead to me."

The defense attorney read texts he claims Mejia sent to Bridges, saying, "I was her first for everything. I love her,” "You don't know me well enough. It's better if you stay away from both of our lives,” and "I'm going to hunt you down like a little pig. You better watch your back this time."

The defense told the court that Bridges responded with his own text, saying, “Don't threaten me."

Investigators testified that Bridges' alleged accomplice said Bridges believed he could get away with killing his romantic rival because he was an avid viewer of the TV drama series Dexter, which is about a serial killer who goes after criminals who slip through the court system.

Bridges has been transferred from a juvenile facility to the Collin County jail.

If convicted, he could face 40 years in prison.

The other suspect, who is 16 years old, is due in court next week where a judge will decide whether or not he, too, will be tried as an adult.

So, what do you guys think? I think the judge did right in making the choice of giving him a trial as an adult. Further, I think this is a kid who didn't know what he was doing and nobody has ever told him the difference between fact and fiction, which Dexter clearly is, fiction.

A further question to ponder is, is it ever okay to harm someone else for the sake of "love"? Is it acceptable to kill someone over wanting to be with them? Or do you guys think this is just another symptom of the macho attitude in certain portions of America? Or is it something completely different?

I don't think harming other people for the sake of "love" or other ideal is correct except for self-defense, so I think that this only furthers the notion that there's certain things that need to be changed, such as the notion that you do anything for love and such other maxims that are noxious for society.

But what say you, NSG?

[Ashmoria]

he knew what he was doing. I see no reason not to try him as an adult.

and no it is never right to try to get rid of romantic rivals through violence. a sweetheart is a person not a prize to be won.

[54e]

This is really sad. Violence is never the answer. The kid should be tried as an adult.

[Conkerials]

He killed a guy, and he's 17. He clearly knows what he was doing, and had knowledge of the consequences. He should be punished accordingly, and the judge did right by that part. However, I feel the sentence may be slightly too elongated. Yes, he killed a guy. Yes, he needs to be punished. However, you're locking him up for literally most of his life where he will lose the ability to gain any social skills and the ability to work anywhere due to lack of prior experience.

The sentence is setting the kid up for doom.

[Great Kleomentia]

he knew what he was doing. I see no reason not to try him as an adult.

and no it is never right to try to get rid of romantic rivals through violence. a sweetheart is a person not a prize to be won.

^

[Kiruri]

A Collin County judge ruled Friday that Brenden Bridges, one of the teens accused in the murder of a Wylie high school student, will be tried as an adult.

Police say Bridges and a friend killed 17-year-old Wylie East High School student Ivan Mejia in March over a girl.

Bridges and the other suspect lured Mejia behind Wylie East High and strangled him, investigators say.

The judge's decision on Friday came after a week of intense and emotional testimony.

Prosecutors argued Mejia's death was cold-blooded, premeditated, physical and done without remorse. They also pointed out that Bridges turned 17 just four days after the crime.

It was revealed during the hearing that Bridges told mutual friends, "I want Ivan out of the way so I can be with her. You don't understand, sometimes I want to kill him,” and "It would be easier if Ivan was out of the picture. Ivan is dead to me."

The defense attorney read texts he claims Mejia sent to Bridges, saying, "I was her first for everything. I love her,” "You don't know me well enough. It's better if you stay away from both of our lives,” and "I'm going to hunt you down like a little pig. You better watch your back this time."

The defense told the court that Bridges responded with his own text, saying, “Don't threaten me."

Investigators testified that Bridges' alleged accomplice said Bridges believed he could get away with killing his romantic rival because he was an avid viewer of the TV drama series Dexter, which is about a serial killer who goes after criminals who slip through the court system.

Bridges has been transferred from a juvenile facility to the Collin County jail.

If convicted, he could face 40 years in prison.

The other suspect, who is 16 years old, is due in court next week where a judge will decide whether or not he, too, will be tried as an adult.

So, what do you guys think? I think the judge did right in making the choice of giving him a trial as an adult. Further, I think this is a kid who didn't know what he was doing and nobody has ever told him the difference between fact and fiction, which Dexter clearly is, fiction.

A further question to ponder is, is it ever okay to harm someone else for the sake of "love"? Is it acceptable to kill someone over wanting to be with them? Or do you guys think this is just another symptom of the macho attitude in certain portions of America? Or is it something completely different?

I don't think harming other people for the sake of "love" or other ideal is correct except for self-defense, so I think that this only furthers the notion that there's certain things that need to be changed, such as the notion that you do anything for love and such other maxims that are noxious for society.

But what say you, NSG?

I could do with some more information... but anyway, I too think the judge did the right thing by having him tried as an adult. I think this is a kid who knew exactly what he was doing. It seems pretty much premeditated. I don't put any blame on Dexter when it seems that the guy was clearly not sane. I have no idea what you mean with the "macho" attitude at all. I don't see any correlation. I just think the killer(s) were a little bit insane.

I also agree with you that harming others or oneself "in the name of love" is completely idiotic, though I don't think many people go to the lengths of killing others "in the name of love", more like other small and not illicit things, which is perfectly okay.

[Cu Math]

He killed a person in a premeditated act and had planned to hide the evidence.
Try him as an adult for murder in the first degree.

[Frazers]

Its a good judgement. I'm not sure how it could be argued otherwise. If it was a crime committed in the heat of the moment I'd hold out more hope for rehabilitation but this is a cold blooded killer. I'd be interested to see what personality disorder he gets labeled with though.

[Kiruri]

He killed a guy, and he's 17. He clearly knows what he was doing, and had knowledge of the consequences. He should be punished accordingly, and the judge did right by that part. However, I feel the sentence may be slightly too elongated. Yes, he killed a guy. Yes, he needs to be punished. However, you're locking him up for literally most of his life where he will lose the ability to gain any social skills and the ability to work anywhere due to lack of prior experience.

The sentence is setting the kid up for doom.

his actions set the kid up for doom.

[The Huskar Social Union]

He killed a person in a premeditated act and had planned to hide the evidence.
Try him as an adult for murder in the first degree.

Agreed.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

So, what do you guys think? I think the judge did right in making the choice of giving him a trial as an adult. Further, I think this is a kid who didn't know what he was doing and nobody has ever told him the difference between fact and fiction, which Dexter clearly is, fiction.

A further question to ponder is, is it ever okay to harm someone else for the sake of "love"? Is it acceptable to kill someone over wanting to be with them? Or do you guys think this is just another symptom of the macho attitude in certain portions of America? Or is it something completely different?

I don't think harming other people for the sake of "love" or other ideal is correct except for self-defense, so I think that this only furthers the notion that there's certain things that need to be changed, such as the notion that you do anything for love and such other maxims that are noxious for society.

But what say you, NSG?

I could do with some more information... but anyway, I too think the judge did the right thing by having him tried as an adult. I think this is a kid who knew exactly what he was doing. It seems pretty much premeditated. I don't put any blame on Dexter when it seems that the guy was clearly not sane. I have no idea what you mean with the "macho" attitude at all. I don't see any correlation. I just think the killer(s) were a little bit insane.

I also agree with you that harming others or oneself "in the name of love" is completely idiotic, though I don't think many people go to the lengths of killing others "in the name of love", more like other small and not illicit things, which is perfectly okay.

What I mean with the "macho" attitude is that certain men feel like their honor/pride/whathaveyou is important, and if they don't have what they want (in this case the girl) is an affront to their masculinity so they will go at lengths to make sure they actually get it - including getting rid of a perceived "rival". Often also represented in the media.

[Giovenith]

It was an appropriate sentence.

No, you can never kill someone over "lurv." This is the 21st century, not goddamn feudal times.

[Kiruri]

I could do with some more information... but anyway, I too think the judge did the right thing by having him tried as an adult. I think this is a kid who knew exactly what he was doing. It seems pretty much premeditated. I don't put any blame on Dexter when it seems that the guy was clearly not sane. I have no idea what you mean with the "macho" attitude at all. I don't see any correlation. I just think the killer(s) were a little bit insane.

I also agree with you that harming others or oneself "in the name of love" is completely idiotic, though I don't think many people go to the lengths of killing others "in the name of love", more like other small and not illicit things, which is perfectly okay.

What I mean with the "macho" attitude is that certain men feel like their honor/pride/whathaveyou is important, and if they don't have what they want (in this case the girl) is an affront to their masculinity so they will go at lengths to make sure they actually get it - including getting rid of a perceived "rival". Often also represented in the media.

Ah, well, I think that has nothing to do with this case.

[Nazi Flower Power]

He killed a guy, and he's 17. He clearly knows what he was doing, and had knowledge of the consequences. He should be punished accordingly, and the judge did right by that part. However, I feel the sentence may be slightly too elongated. Yes, he killed a guy. Yes, he needs to be punished. However, you're locking him up for literally most of his life where he will lose the ability to gain any social skills and the ability to work anywhere due to lack of prior experience.

The sentence is setting the kid up for doom.

his actions set the kid up for doom.

If they're going to lock him up that long, they should just go ahead and make it life. A 40 year sentence helps no one and serves no purpose. It's just not practical to lock someone up for that long and then dump them back out into the world where they will not have the skills and experience to support themselves effectively.

[The New Sea Territory]

Fighting over girls hurts people.

Solution: ban heterosexual relationships. No more fighting over girls.

[The New Sea Territory]

He killed a person in a premeditated act and had planned to hide the evidence.
Try him as an adult for murder in the first degree.

You don't fucking try people who are not adults by definition as adults.

You are giving them the responsibilities of an adult, but they don't have adult rights.

[Gaiserin]

Well that was dark.

Fighting over girls hurts people.

Solution: ban heterosexual relationships. No more fighting over girls.

"I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that"

[Giovenith]

He killed a person in a premeditated act and had planned to hide the evidence.
Try him as an adult for murder in the first degree.

You don't fucking try people who are not adults by definition as adults.

You are giving them the responsibilities of an adult, but they don't have adult rights.

They have the cognitive ability of an adult on deciding whether or not to murder someone, despite what law books define an adult us. We shouldn't ignore that and put them on the same level as a minor who genuinely doesn't know what they're doing.

[The New Sea Territory]

You don't fucking try people who are not adults by definition as adults.

You are giving them the responsibilities of an adult, but they don't have adult rights.

They have the cognitive ability of an adult on deciding whether or not to murder someone, despite what law books define an adult us. We shouldn't ignore that and put them on the same level as a minor who genuinely doesn't know what they're doing.

But if they don't have the legal rights of being 18 then they don't have the legal responsibilities of being 18.

[The New Sea Territory]

Well that was dark.

Fighting over girls hurts people.

Solution: ban heterosexual relationships. No more fighting over girls.

"I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that"

Sure we can. They only cause problems, harm, are immoral and have no value.

[Alcase]

40 years?!

What a light sentence for such a horrific murder.

[Gaiserin]

Well that was dark.



"I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that"

Sure we can. They only cause problems, harm, are immoral and have no value.

Now now, it isn't nice to hate the majority, even if you're a rapid LGBT warrior~

[Couasia]

Try the brat as an adult. He's 17, he clearly knows what he's doing.

[The Serbian Empire]

He killed a guy, and he's 17. He clearly knows what he was doing, and had knowledge of the consequences. He should be punished accordingly, and the judge did right by that part. However, I feel the sentence may be slightly too elongated. Yes, he killed a guy. Yes, he needs to be punished. However, you're locking him up for literally most of his life where he will lose the ability to gain any social skills and the ability to work anywhere due to lack of prior experience.

The sentence is setting the kid up for doom.

Isn't that the consequence of committing a murder though?

[The New Sea Territory]

Try the brat as an adult. He's 17, he clearly knows what he's doing.

Ah, yes. Let's make a minor have all the legal responsibilities of an adult, but fuck giving him his legal rights he deserves as an adult.