They did not deny the seriousness of the crimes.
Instead, they asked the court to consider who had committed them.
They pointed to decades of scientific research showing that adolescent brains are still developing. They argued that teenagers often lack the judgment, impulse control, and long-term decision-making abilities expected from adults.
According to the defense, the young defendant should not be viewed as a finished product.
They argued that growth, change, and rehabilitation remained possible.
Continue on the next page:
