Cold-Blooded Killers Weren't Born That Way

`A NEW generation of killers, feeling no blame and no shame." That's how they were introduced by the headline on the front page of the Dec. 6 Sunday edition of The Philadelphia Inquirer.

A sub-headline called them "The young and the ruthless."

There was Yerodeen Williams, 17, who shot and killed a man who hesitated when he was told to hand over money during a holdup.

There was Kerry Marshall, 17, who shot and killed a woman fish seller when she reached for a knife as he tried to rob her.

There was Richard Caraballo, 17, who shot and killed a taxi driver for demanding to be paid the $7 fare on the meter.

There was Andre Johnson, 16, who beat a University of Pennsylvania graduate student to death with a tree limb and then rifled his pockets of $11.16.

There was Kenyatta Miles, 18, who shot and killed a 15-year-old honor student for a new pair of Air Jordan sneakers.

The list was long. There were 13 other young men interviewed. Only two had been 18 when their crimes were committed. At least one was only 14 when he took part in a senseless, brutal murder. All are in jail, many for the rest of their lives.

The story was graphic and particularly disturbing because of how relatively easy it was to round up such a large number of such young - but cold-blooded - killers.

The writer chose to highlight the blatant disregard for humanity exhibited by these young men and the bizarre code of ethics they seemed to live by.

As repulsive as Williams' pulling the trigger on his victim at an automatic teller machine was his rationale that the dead man "brung this on himself" by not handing over the money quickly enough.

It is as hard to understand Johnson's brutal beating of the Penn student as it is his explanation that the incident happened because the victim looked him in the eye.

"You walk past somebody, you don't look them in the eye . . . ," said Johnson. ". . . If our eyes meet, the dude's looking for trouble."

As frightening as his crime is reading Miles' quote that he did not kill in cold blood for a pair of sneakers, because "I didn't shoot him two or three times. I shot him once. . . . I wouldn't call myself no murderer."

Two related editorial columns ran in the days that followed.

One, by an Inquirer columnist, despaired at stories that didn't tell the whole story about how young people got to the point of taking life without remorse.

That point of view was shot down by a writer, who is also a friend and former colleague, at the afternoon paper. He felt some people are just plain evil, belong in jail and should not have any pity wasted on them.

I talked to the writer of the second column, who reiterated his belief that societal ills are not the prime producers of vicious killers and that there was nothing that could be done for the teenage boys whose words and pictures were spread over three pages of the widely circulated Sunday paper.

It sounded to me almost as if my friend was saying there was something genetic in this kind of behavior, and I told him so. He said that wasn't his intention, but there were some people he was glad were behind bars.

There's not much argument about that one. There are most certainly people who are not safe to have on the streets and for whom almost no degree of rehabilitation would be enough. I grew up around some people who fit that description, and I'm not just hypothesizing about their existence.

But the central question for me is how they got that way. I just don't buy that it was something in their genes or that a certain number of people are destined to be psychopathic killers.

By discounting the folks who are already too far over the edge to be brought back, we set up whole new generations of young people to follow in their footsteps.

There is something wrong with the messages sent to youngsters who believe they should not be severely punished, because "It's not like I'm a serial killer. I didn't kill a lot of people."

There is something wrong with the messages we send to youngsters who believe their two job options are pushing dope or robbing people.

Whatever is wrong can't keep being attributed to non-existent or dysfunctional parents while 13- and 14-year-old boys are being sent to prison for life, because they never learned any respect for life.

Given that lack of understanding, it may be silly and counterproductive to give so much attention to young killers. The callous - often downright ignorant - comments were made by boys who didn't have enough sense not to pose for an ID photo while trying to cash the payroll check of a murdered man.

What they did know is they have to survive in prison with people who look for any trace of weakness or vulnerability. Some of their bravado was undoubtedly real. But some of it also had to be that they were young boys, with no guns in the midst of hardened convicts.

These boys have reached a point where jail is their present and their future. But they weren't born that way. Something could have been done to save them, and there is much that can be done now to save the boys who will be interviewed when another reporter writes this same story in five or 10 years.

It is also important to note that these boys gone bad are not representative of young people. There are children of all races and socio-economic backgrounds, from single-parent, two-parent and no-parent families who grow up amid deplorable conditions and don't rob, assault or murder.

What's needed is some focus and some three-page Sunday spreads about survivors and success stories. There is also a desperate need for many more concerned adults willing to volunteer time and effort to help create those success stories and prevent them from turning into tragedies.

We'll talk more later. Don Williamson's column appears Sunday, Tuesday and Thursday on editorial pages of The Times.