September 19, 2007
During an appeal hearing held yesterday in Alabama, attorneys for Devin Moore (left) argued that he killed two police officers and a dispatcher in 2003 partly because he was influenced by Grand Theft Auto III and Grand Theft Auto Vice City.His defense team also alleged racial bias, given that Moore, who is African-American, faced an all-white jury during his 2005 criminal trial. As reported by the Tuscaloosa News:
Angela L. Setzer, his appellate lawyer from the Equal Justice Initiative of Alabama, told Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals judges that Moore didn’t get a fair trial because the judge had disallowed expert testimony [regarding the video game influence] and the prosecutor improperly removed black jurors...
At trial, his attorney tried to argue that post-traumatic stress disorder from severe childhood abuse and repeated playing of “Grand Theft Auto" caused him to disassociate from reality when stressed.
“You act out without thinking," Setzer said. “In an automatic state you revert to behavior ... and it was critical the jury hear this testimony."
Arguing against Moore's appeal, Assistant Attorney General Michael Nunnelley called the video game defense a "novel theory" and said:
He did not precisely imitate what he had done in a video game...
No ruling has been issued on Moore's appeal. Should it fail, his death row conviction will automatically be referred to the Alabama Supreme Court for review.
Comments
Moore was responsible for his own actions, end of story.
That's because his arguement was bollocks.
Well said. Although if you live in the states I do advise at least reading a book on firearms.
If firing a virtual gun can make you a better shooter, then shouldn't swinging a virtual sword make you a better swordsman? By that logic I should be an international weapons master and ready to open my own dojo somewhere... Because you know... I 'trained' on Soul Calibur 3.
Sorry. had to.
Keep in mind friends, this is the same guy who you might have seen on TV saying "I did it, and if I could, I'd do it again", so I don't think there's any 'racial bias' or 'Video game Influence' involved here.
He did wrong, and ought to be hanged.
As much as I'd love to debunk the Twinkie Defense, I can't.
The judge rejected it because he knew it was bullshit. There has never been a link of causation between vioelence or violent acts and videogames. There have been correlations forged, but there's a correlation between reading Catcher in the Rye and vioelence in schools, and a correlation between eating breakfast and violence.
So your belief on this case doesn't matter, and you're still an idiot.
You're a liar and a snake,
Austin Lewis.
The Twinklie Defense needs the twinkie and other junk food to be eaten, so what you said can never be called the Twinkle Defense.
http://www.snopes.com/legal/twinkie.asp(Snopes)
Did you REALLY hold your book up in the courtroom? Did you REALLY do that?
Is it all about the attention for you?
Humans.... how childish!
During his questioning of Rosenzweig, Judge Moore asked the psychologist about the existence of any research relating specifically to video games causing violent behavior in people suffering from PTSD. Rosenzweig told the judge there were no such studies she knew of using those tightly-defined parameters.
Besides that, Devin Moore is a liar trying to get away with murder.
Moore(and Jacky Boy and Standridge) lied about his statement made when he was arrested:
When Moore was arrested, it was stated he made the comment, “Everybody has got to die sometime.” This was later amended in December 2004 during a motion hearing claiming the statement was, “Life’s a video game. You’ve got to die sometimes.”
-------
In an earlier interview, Thompson’s(Devin Moore) father, Kenneth Moore and Fayette County High School Principal Radford Hester told The Tuscaloosa News the teen had many discipline problems at home and school.
Kenneth Moore describes his son as someone who loved trouble, stealing cars and dabbling in drugs.
“He was a good kid to people in town, but as soon as you get to know him he would change for worse,” Kenneth Moore said.
http://cathodetan.blogspot.com/2005/06/what-they-arent-saying.html
------------
Moore may be lying about the alledged child abuse:
Story from 2003 at the time of the arrest:
http://www.tremcopoliceproducts.com/fayette.htm
Moore's father told The AP that his son was a troubled young man.
"I kept telling people about it, going to the church and telling people he was a troubled child, but people didn't pay me no mind," he said. "I raised him from a baby, but people don't listen."
Kenneth Moore said he sent his son to live with the young man’s mother two years ago because he couldn’t control him. He said that his son would often steal his car and that last year his mother found a gun in the house belonging to him.
"I'm a discipline parent and everybody around town knows I'm a good parent," Moore said. "One parent can't do it all by himself."
------------
To summarize:
-Devin Moore was arrested in June 2003
-Moore’s father sent him to live with Moore’s mother “two years earlier”.
-Moore’s father described Moore as a person who “loved trouble, stealing cars, and dabbling in drugs”.
Which means that Devin Moore was stealing cars BEFORE GTA3 was even released, making the video game defense NULL and VOID.
Tell us more of jacks antics, we need a refresher.
@Jack
Tenuous link at best, does not defeat the burden of proof, does not go beyond any reasonable doubt, youre a lawyer so tell me what that means?
FAILURE, thats why it was thrown out, and thats the truth, you lose and a killer doesnt get away with scapegoating and shifting the blame from his own mistakes.
I believe this will get thrown out again as there are still no studies supporting this plea.
E. Zachary Knight
Divine Knight Gaming
Random Tower: Game News and Commentary
Jack, if this ridiculous defense were to work, a guy who MURDERED 3 COPS IN COLD BLOOD could be set free. Is that what you really want? I thought you were about protecting the families and children, but I guess your true motives are the gains you'd get from the wrongful death suit that could move forward if this appeal works.
You should be ashamed of yourself. Moore belongs in prison for life and deserves a death sentence.
Remember folks, you heard it here. Jack is in favor of letting a multiple murderer free to roam the streets and go back to stealing cars.
Created by the one and only Takashi Okazaki, Afro Samurai has been destined for greatest ever since its conception. Starring one of the worlds most renowned actors, Samuel L. Jackson is the voice of the Afro Samurai. Produced by GONZO, which is a...
I'll accept the POSSIBILITY of "reversable error" as everyone who has kept up with various legal cases over just the last 25 years will know ANYTHING is possible in a court of law. Criminals get off on technicalities while the innocent are still found guilty and remain guilty even when proof beyond any shred of reasonable doubt has come forth saying otherwise. So, yes, it is POSSIBLE. Do I believe it WILL happen? The jury is still out, pun intended. :)
On the issue in the story about multiple "excuses", to be honest, I'm beginning to thing some dingbat created a giant dartboard and each section has an "excuse" in it. Some valid excuses, others "out there". And various attornies, both prosecutors and defense, blindfold themselves turn their backs to the board, and toss darts over their shoulders at the board and whatever hits, is what they use for their arguments.
Even the "I was abused as a child" argument can be misused and overused. As was pointed out earlier, there is question whether he is telling the truth regarding his prior abuse. Frankly, I'd be more sympathetic to the argument had he not tried to use every other "excuse" as well. Certainly, Cody Posey's "defense" was understandable, though not utterly forgiveable nor should it make him not responsible for his actions. Moore might... MIGHT... have received the same "understanding" if he hadn't turned to, in effect, "it's not my fault, it's everyone else's!"
Nightwng2000
NW2K Software
"Protecting the Children" my ass.
Even IF (and that's a big if) video games influenced his actions, that does not excuse him. That is no "get out of jail free" card, in my opinion. That would merely explain what influenced his actions, but he would still be guilty and solely responsible for HIS OWN ACTIONS. No one and nothing else should share the blame that lies on his shoulders. This is his burden to bare. If I've said it once, I've said it a thousand times, this is an explanation, not an excuse.
I'd also like to call BS on the jury claim. I can't help but think that his innocence would be apparent to a 'white jury' just as much as a 'black jury' or a 'mixed jury'. Yes, there are still racists out there, but isn't one of the jobs of the lawyers to remove those people from the jury pool? And don't forget that the Defense attorney can also remove potential jurors.
All in all, I hope this gets shot down like a duck in Duck Hunt.
the defense rests. :P
In fact, studies tend to show the exact opposite.
“You act out without thinking,” Setzer said. “In an automatic state you revert to behavior … and it was critical the jury hear this testimony.”
While this "may" be true I use the words "may be" because I never heard of someone reverting to the behavior of jumping on heads and eating mushrooms when stressed.
The targeting of games in this realm makes no sense, and here's why. The vast majority of GTA players do not actually kill innocent people, yet all cretins like Jack Thompson can do is point to the few bad apples that do, like Moore, and use them as an example why GTA needs to be banned or regulated.
And that's bullshit.
I 100% believe that the overwhelming majority of people who saw "Taxi Driver" didn't shoot Ronald Regan in a misguided attempt to impress Jodie Foster. Should "Taxi Driver" be banned or regulated because of the actions of John Hinckley Jr.?
Should "Helter Skelter" by The Beatles be banned or regulated because of the actions of Charles Manson?
Should the ownership of dogs by banned or regulated because of the actions of David "Son of Sam" Berkowitz?
That all makes as much sense as banning or regulating GTA (or any violent games) because of the actions of Devin Moore.
I'd love to see you argue this point, Jack.
And what "stress" makes you kill a policeman?
One pulled me over a week ago, said I was going three miles over the speed limit. I certainly didn't shoot him for that, although it made me miss the movie I was going to.
Nice XD
There's a wiki entry for that? Wahah! Take that Jack "I've got my own wikipedia entry" Thompson.
The only mistake ever made in this case was ever letting you near it, and that has already been reversed
Let me get this straight. You got pulled over for going three miles over the speed limit? I knew that my state passed a law that said police could pull you over for going three miles an hour over the speed limit (State Patrol can do it at one mile over), but never actually heard of them doing it. Wait. Was it near the end of the month? They tend to get desperate to hit their quota, err.. I mean 'Production' around that time.
You're right, though. No minor stress makes you resort to killing people. Maybe if they were trying to kill him, he'd have a case, but I doubt that since he killed three of them, one of which was a dispatcher. Even trained soldiers don't resort to killing people at minor stress. The closest they come to that is taking evasive action when a car backfires (hence why the military tells you not to drive after returning from duty until you've been debriefed properly).
Games do not train you to kill people, fight or even fire a gun. Let me play a game like Halo or Warhawk and I'll bravely face-off against tanks or armed soldiers, but throw a gun in my face and I'll hand over my wallet. I wouldn’t know a M-16 from an AK-47 and doubt I have any accuracy with an actual firearm. Probably the only gun I could actually use is a handgun, and even that would be bereft of any skill. To even suggest that a video game could of caused his action distracts from the real problems that shaped him. Let’s start with his broken home and work from there.
Not necessarily. The judge asked for proof that it wasn't just a "the devil made me do it" defense.
Remember the Twinkie defense was only allowed because the science was there to show that wacky blood sugar levels CAN cause judgment impairment.
The judge asked for similar data, and the psychologist could provide NONE.
So the argument was deemed "not applicable".
In order to get it reversed, you'd have to prove that the judge willingly ignored data relevant to the argument. In this case however, the data you claim exists was never provided. So that's the defense's fault, not the judge's.
And the defense being incompetent is not a reversible error. Not unless they missed some crucial piece of data that exonerated him from all guilt or something stupid like that. Changing the degree of guilt does nothing.
I'm glad the judge threw out that defense. It's time people started taking responsibility for their own actions. A copy of "Vice City" didn't pull the trigger for Devin Moore.
From the argument he made (Stress and GTA), it made it sound like after the "abuse" his father gave him, he'd go play GTA to make it all go away.
It's sad to see that the "Games made me do it" defense still being used. IF anything, I'd blame Clue or Risk, because those games made killing other people fun before video games.
GTA2 was from ~1999, 3 from ~2001.
The prosecution already stated that the defendant didn't claim what he was trying to reenact. As a result, the direct route of standard interrogation could easily trip up the defendant (e.g. ask him details about the original game or how he obtained it.)
I'm not a lawyer, but the prosecuting attorney is. He could easily bring in experts to make sure the defense would be discredited in future cases as well, although he only needs to do it for this single case.
I mean, if he was killing cops in the game, that was a personal choice--one for which the game would have actually punished him--and the controller and 3rd person view wouldn't have come near the real thing to push him over the edge. Besides which, it's not like the game was with him at the time of the murderers or even like he killed in a manner culled form the game.
Even if somehow the video game were held culpable, then he's still guilty of the same crime he's already been convicted of, because the game didn't make or even ask (I think the latter was true) him to kill cops. So if he DID do a lot of cop-killing in the game and the faulty premise that playing the game "conditioned" him to kill real cops were true, then he chose to kill cops in the game and willingly gave himself that conditioning.
If he equated the game or killing cops in it with real life, then THAT would mean he intentionally practised killing cops in the game (not because it would help him kill them in real life but because he wanted kill them). So, in and out of the game, without pressure to do so he decided to commit murder and remains fully accountable for his choices and actions.
That's best case scenario for that murderer; since there's no way the game could have MADE him do anything, and he was quite cold-blooded, he's unlikely to get the insanity plea. Without which, the "video games made him do it" angle isn't even remotely plausible.
However, if he were found to be crazy at the time of the murders, that would still exonerate video games because there's no way of singling out what pushed him over the edge, and without the video games he still would have been deranged enough to commit those heinous murders.
It just seems odd to me that his lawyer wouldn't have bothered to check into the game he's claiming warped his client, because the simplest amount of research would have revealed that those who killed cops in GTAIII chose to do so and to accept the punishment for that, therefore were not in any way compelled to kill cops in the game. And if the game didn't make him kill the virtual cops, there's no way it could have made him kill the real ones.
Thank you. I wanted to say something just like that to point out that the real issue is that this guy needs to be locked and have the key thrown away. He is guilty.
Wow, just wow. You want to protect a guy like this? A guy who has no qualms about killing people? You want this guy to get away with what he's done? Because if that cop had been anyone in my family, I would want him put away for life. I doubt you would do differently.
Alabama did one better. He's on death row!
"GTA was released in ~1997. He’s aged 22, and the first time he could have access to the game would be the age of 12. I’m not sure how popular GTA was on it’s first release, but normally a parent would have purhcased the game or he must have pirated it.
GTA2 was from ~1999, 3 from ~2001."
GTA and GTA2 were both top-down 2D games, not 3D games, so they didn't have anywhere near the same media impact that GTA3 and subsequent games did. So his first exposure to what the media calls GTA would have been at 16 or 17 - an age by which he had already become an antisocial prick, by all accounts.
I was actually driving to my Pub from the Fort where I am stationed. I was speeding a little, and so the cop came up and turned on his lights (yes, it was the end of the month; the 29th, to be exact)
He saw my uniform and saw the patches, and just said "well sir, you need to be a little more careful driving here; there's a playground nearby, and sometimes kids are here", to which I responded "well, I'll be sure to exercise more caution."
The thing is, the whole time I had my 1911 on the seat next to me, and not ONCE did it occur to me to use it on him. He asked me if I had any weapons, I pulled the clip out, locked it back, and handed it to him before he could protest about me picking it up.
Having fired over 400 different rifles, assault rifles, pistol, Automatic Rifles, and miscellaneous other weapons (like a Russian pen that fires .22s), and I can tell you WITHOUT A DOUBT that you can't learn how to fire one from a game. You MAY be able to learn about the most basic operation of certain weapons in certain games, but honestly, anyone who picks up an M16 (or any other weapon of M16/AR15 design) and can't operate it with no prior knowledge is retarded; once its in your hand, its easy to figure out.
What no amount of gaming CAN POSSIBLY teach you is the proper way to fire a rifle. The proper amount of pressure with which you pull the trigger. The way that you hold it when you fire. The way that you control your breathing. The way you adjust your sights. You can't learn that save by real experience.
And I would argue that point with Jack Thompson any day of the week.
Oh and by the way Jack; The USARMY doesn't really use videogames to train. We have MOUT, which is like an expensive lasertag. We have simulations, which are expensive to operate and maintain. But we don't use games.
A pen that fires .22s.. Ingenious. You ever tried a Speargun? Like those ones divers use?