"Video Games Made Me Do It" Defense in Alabama Murder Trial

February 28, 2008 -

The lawyer for a man being tried for murder is trying to convince an Alabama jury that the defendant believed he was acting out a video game when he murdered an 80-year-old man on Halloween, 2005.

As reported by the Decatur Daily, Andrew Reid Lackey, 24, does not dispute that he stabbed, shot and gouged out the eye of his victim, Charlie Newman. However, Lackey's attorney, Randy Gladden, is pointing the finger at video games. From the newspaper report:

Actions that led to a deadly confrontation between a defendant and an 80-year-old widower resembled a video game to the accused...

[Attorney] Gladden described Lackey (seen at left) as a computer geek who had immersed himself in video games and lived in "a different world than you and I."

Tapes of a 911 call made by the victim during the fatal confrontation, however, indicate that old-school greed may have been the motive. Lackey is heard to demand of the victim, "Where's the vault?" seven different times. Charlie Newman's grandson had previously told Lackey that the victim kept a large sum of money in a vault under the stairs. However, no such vault existed.

No video games were specified in the news report. However, items recovered by the police from Lackey's car (ski mask, a knife, a police scanner, night vision goggles, stun gun) suggest that the defendant put a lot of real-world thought into planning the crime.

Lackey's trial resumes today.


This is lame. The lawyer must be desesperated. I hope he get his license revoked for stupidity.


I fucking love this country. Don't want to accept responsibility for something you did? Just pin the blame on someone or something else.

I hope they reprimand the defense attorney for using this defense. Any attorney who decides to use a defense like that deserves to be hit upside the head with a ball bat and fined for utter stupidity.

Totally right. I would expect Jackie boy to chime in any minute as an expert, to get this poor soul the not guilty verdict he so deserves. The sad part is, Jack seems to be so brainwashed by himself he would see letting a murderer go free as a victory, since it would have been a blow against his enemy. From all I can tell he is well beyond the ability to think rationally and to step back from his crusade and see the big picture.

Luckily, I think most of the population isn't stupid enough to fall for it.. these defenses rarely seem to work out.

Anyone else find it hilarious that a man who's being pushed by a seemingly anti-game lawyer to blame videogames has the last name of "Lackey"?

As long as there is a compotent prosecutor on the job, he won't get away with this. This looks like a job for http://www.ace-attorney.net/content/images/artworks/gs1/edgeworth_pointi...!


I think we already all know of a lawyer who hasd proven that you don't get your license revoked for being stupid.

Things found in the victim's car according to the article

"Starter pistol


Stun gun

Orange ski mask

Roll of tape


Night vision goggles

Police scanner

Mallet with a white towel taped around it



Five screwdrivers

Two tube socks stuffed with rope

Super Glue


Utility belt that would hold extra gun clips "

Conclusion: He was influenced by MacGyver. End of discussion.


But nothing created God so . . . NOTHING IS KILLING PEOPLE.

And pieces of paper come with nothing on them so paper is killing people.

Yet trees and people make paper, so they're killing paper.

But if God created humans and trees and nothing created God.

My God I just a new paradox sort of like the who is a murderer the chicken or the egg? And if God created the chicken and gave it egg-laying powers. . .

Wait a minute humans were the victims that means no humans no murder

Humans are killing themselves!!! (Without Dr. Kevorkian)

But if God creates humans . . .

Wait a minute free will makes us kill humans, so if we had no free will.

Ah the fuck with it let's just imprison the guy.

[...] Another one of those Video Games Made Me Do It defence in a murder case: The lawyer for a man being tried for murder is trying to convince an Alabama jury that the defendant believed he was acting out a video game when he murdered an 80-year-old man on Halloween, 2005. As reported by the Decatur Daily, Andrew Reid Lackey, 24, does not dispute that he stabbed, shot and gouged out the eye of his victim, Charlie Newman. However, Lackey

Just to make sure what this is basically saying. They want to say that if we play video games, we can commit any crime we want and claim that the games made me do it?

None of us live in the same world as any of the rest of us. I live in a world of numbers and lines of code. That doesn't mean that I can hurt another person and claim that I didn't realize they were alive. It's quite simple, he heard this guy had money, he prepared himself, he broke in and hurt this man while asking where the money was, then he killed him.

In my opinion, anyone that would hurt osmeone else to take their stuff is already broken. He should be held to the same standards as everyone else. He knew what he was doing, he knew it was wrong, and it was clearly premeditated and for the purpose of gain.

Fry 'im.

Normally with a story like this one I simply scoff at it. However with the name 'Lackey' I cant help but wonder if the chump was fated to do something really stupid in life. I guess it is one of those nature vs nurture things. Hell he is not even smart enough to blame the Devil for his actions in a highly conservative religious district. It sure makes one wonder -no?

Not when passing said football or helping out injured comrades involves pressing a sequence of buttons, no. Just as playing Monster Hunter wouldn't help me fight off giant monsters and playing Pokemon won't make me in to some kind of wonderous animal breeder. And as for our current murderer being 24 excludes him from the world of Santa Clause and the Boogyman.

[...] Another Attempt To Blame The Video Game For Murder The rather infamous Jack Thompson gained his fame by picking up various lawsuits that involved kids shooting people and trying to get them off by blaming the video game. Rather than admit guilt, he was attempting to keep murderers from getting convicted by saying that it was the video game that made them do it. It appears that others are now picking up on this tactic. Adam Thierer points us to a recent case where a lawyer isn’t arguing that his client, a 24-year-old, didn’t commit a murder. He’s arguing that the guy thought he was playing a video game. This is a really weak way to try to get someone acquitted of murder — and says quite a bit about the lawyers who would use this sort of defense. As the article notes, the actual evidence suggests that video games had nothing to do with the murder, and that it was an old-fashioned robbery attempt. [...]


These claims have failed 9 times out of ten, Tv too failed and now the the blame game levels up to games...can we say fail too?


No clue how i mistyped that

This is disgusting, pathetic and obscene, another example of these morally bankrupt jackholes trying to turn someones tragedy into their own profit!

And for what? so they can get videogames banned? Remove the greatest artistic movement of our time? what does that gain?

These people should be hung drawn and quartered, and it is coming to the point where I will gladly get in on the action.

He shoulda said "God made me do it". That's been a bigger defense lately. And it's more likely to get you a mental illness result than having to take responsibility for youractions.

After all, no one wants the church to take the blame for murder.

But then, that's Alabama for ya.

Gee, wonder where they got the idea for the defense? :/

NW2K Software
Nightwng2000 NW2K Software http://www.facebook.com/nightwing2000 Nightwng2000 is now admin to the group "Parents For Education, Not Legislation" on MySpace as http://groups.myspace.com/pfenl

"Jack Thompson made me do it!"

*sigh* Can we get the greedy little murdering bastard to just enter a plea of guilty? This defense equates to the same thing, aside the fact that it once again adds tarnish to the games industry.

The twinkies made me do it...

All together now! *facepalm*

Ugh, lawyers. Always trying to win no matter the cost.

I'm just surprised lawyers haven't tried to use this more often.


I like the idea, but doesn't being hung eliminate the need to draw and quarter someone? *innocent whistle*

"I'm not a bad person you see. But when i drink, I do and say things that I normally wouldn't do"

"Oh no... it's the Mel Gibson defense"

In which game can you gouge out eyeballs? I want some of that! They'd make great serial killer trophies, you could shrink them & dangle them by the optic nerve from a charm bracelet!

Okay psycho hat off now. The guy's a typical modern cowardly knob trying to absolve himself of responsibility by citing whatever is remotely controversial. One day I'd like to see them say "rage & greed made me do it" as a defence, if nothing else the unprecedented burst of honesty might get a not guilty ruling simply from the shock...

You weren't hanged until you were dead, you were hanged until NEARLY dead. From wikipedia:

Until 1814, the full punishment for the crime of treason was to be hanged, drawn and quartered in that the condemned prisoner would be:

Dragged on a hurdle (a wooden frame) to the place of execution. (This is one possible meaning of drawn.)

Hanged by the neck for a short time or until almost dead. (hanged).

Disembowelled and emasculated and the genitalia and entrails burned before the condemned's eyes (This is another meaning of drawn — see the reference to the Oxford English Dictionary below.)[2]

Beheaded and the body divided into four parts (quartered).

Typically, the resulting five parts (i.e. the four quarters of the body and the head) were gibbeted (put on public display) in different parts of the city, town, or, in famous cases, country, to deter would-be traitors who had not seen the execution. After 1814 the convict would be hanged until dead and the mutilation would be performed after death. Gibbeting was abolished in England in 1843. Drawing and quartering was abolished in 1870.

See now that's a real man's deterrent! Bugger this girly 10 years in prison bollocks, bring it back at least for rapists, child molesters & paris hilton!

ooh the psycho hat seems to have fallen back on my head towards the end of my last post...

Oh, the poor victim. Say, they have games on the internets, right? THE INTERNETS IS KILLING PEOPLE!

He shoulda gone with the twinkie defense. That actually worked.

Shoot, I meant to have a </stupid> tag in there

They haven't found any proof on videogames (they didn't even FOUND video games (at leas no yet) in his home) so this defence will quickly fall apart. Beside, it's the attorney, not the perpetrator who blames the video games.


No, wait! The internet can be accessed via computer. COMPUTERS ARE KILLING PEOPLE!

Oy, reminds me of that kdi who beat a homeless man to death and just for kicks said video games made him do it, just so he could watch gamers be persecuted further

ahh stupidity its so fun afterall hes basically saying "I'm guilty but its not my fault" no one believes it when its a "god's work" thing or they think they're crazy at this point will the public really be sympathetic tyo a "games made me do it" defense from a 24-year old who killed and 80-year old for money...or am I just giving the general populace too much credit?

We have Jack Thompson to thank for this. Now if you want to commit a horrific crime, then get off easy withan insanity ruling and a cushy institution rather than prison, AND give your family the opportunity to sue an electronics company for millions, all you have to do is say "Video games made me do it".

As has been mentioned, metal and D&D have previously been blamed for crimes, yet now people laugh about those cases and the idiots that pursued them. I just wish we could reach that stage with video games.


The games have been ditched!!!

We'll hear it when someone attaches himself to this.

@Void Munashii

But people access the computers that access the internet that access the games which means....



Does the prosecutor have a decent rebuttal for these claims?

Hopefully someone intelligent is handling the case and can show how games had little to do with this guy's actions.


If the proscecutor doesn't have one, may I suggest "STFU N00B!"...

So he's a murderous money-grabbing nutcase?
Love the 'God made me do it' defence people are stating on here!

I'm curious to know what game his attorney is claiming he re-enacted. No way you can do that in Grand Theft Auto so that eliminates that possibility. Mortal Kombat fatalities can be gruesome but not even close to that. Manhunt? Dream on.

Personally, based upon the items stated, I have come to the conclusion that he is guilty of Murder in the First Degree in that he planned and knew EXACTLY what he was doing.

Papa Midnight

Everyone who has tried this silly defense was convicted. This defense attorney is incompetent.

Let's watch this fail, i'm handing out popcorn, brownies, and beer for those old enough to drink.

"ski mask, a knife, a police scanner, night vision goggles, stun gun"

Splinter Cell?

"ski mask, a knife, a police scanner, night vision goggles, stun gun"

Splinter Cell?

Ok...he admits to shooting, stabbing and gouging the guy's eye out...yet it wasn't his fault? Alright then, I'm sure video games are giving out magical mind control rays. I agree with the hanged, drawn, and quartered approach to punishment.

All the judge needs to do is take one look at the case of Selby and Andrews (Hi-Fi Murders) and this defense will resemble a block of swiss cheese.

In that case, they tried to blame Magnum Force (could be one of the other movies in the Dirty Harry series) for the murders.

Sounds like the attorney is clutching at last straws before turning to Lackey and saying "You're boned buddy."

Or it could also be another attorney riding the moral media crusade wagon to blame games for his own purposes. I dunno.

"A big vault of money made me do it!"

Seriously, can we blame the government for the murder, for making money so valuable? I mean, they make money. They obviously are causing others to behave irrationally because of the stuff. Ban money!

Ok... I'm going to stop being silly now.


Sorry video games made me do it.
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :


Which group is more ethically challenged?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
E. Zachary KnightGoth, if Union dues are automatically withdrawn, then there is no such thing as a non-union employee.07/07/2015 - 2:38pm
Goth_Skunka mutually agreed upon charity instead.07/07/2015 - 2:33pm
Goth_Skunkyou enjoy the benefits of working in a union environment. If working in a union is against your religious beliefs or just something you wholeheartedly object to, dues will still be deducted from your pay, but you can instruct that they be directed towards07/07/2015 - 2:33pm
Goth_SkunkBasically, if you are employed in a business where employees are represented by a union for the purposes of collective bargaining, whether or not you are a union member, you will have union dues deducted from your pay, since regardless of membership,07/07/2015 - 2:32pm
Goth_SkunkIt's something that has existed in Canada since 1946. You can read more on it here: http://ow.ly/PiHWR07/07/2015 - 2:27pm
Goth_SkunkSee, we have something similar in Canada, called a "Rand Employee." This is an employee who benefits from the collective bargaining efforts of a union, despite not wanting to be a part of it for whatever reason.07/07/2015 - 2:22pm
Matthew Wilson@info depends on the sector. for example, have you looked at how powerful unions are in the public sector? I will make the argument they have too much power in that sector.07/07/2015 - 12:39pm
InfophileIt's easy to worry about unions having too much power and causing harm. The odd thing is, why do people seem to worry about that more than the fact that business-owners can have too much power and do harm, particularly at a time when unions have no power?07/07/2015 - 12:31pm
Matthew Wilsonthe thing is unions earned their bad reputation in the US. the way unions oparate the better at your job you are, the likely you want to be in a union.07/07/2015 - 11:33am
InfophilePut that way, "right to work" seems to have BLEEP-all to do with gay rights. Thing is, union-negotiated contracts used to be one of the key ways to prevent employers from firing at will. Without union protection, nothing stops at-will firing.07/07/2015 - 11:06am
Infophilehas an incentive to pay dues if they're represented either way, so the union is starved for funds and dies, unless things are bad enough that people will pay dues anyway.07/07/2015 - 11:02am
InfophileFor those who don't know, "right to work" laws mean that it can't be a condition of an employment contract that you pay union dues. That is, the right to work without having to pay dues. Catch is, unions have to represent non-members as well, so no one...07/07/2015 - 11:01am
MechaCrashUnexpected? Seriously?07/07/2015 - 10:55am
Mattsworknamejob they wanted without the unions getting involved. The problem is, it has some unexpected side effects, like the ones Info mentioned07/07/2015 - 8:49am
MattsworknameThe problem being, right to work states exsist specificly as a counter to Unions, as the last 20 or so years have shown, the unions have been doing this countries economoy NO favors. The right to work states came into being to allow people to work any07/07/2015 - 8:49am
Infophile(cont'd) discriminatory. This can only be done for protected classes which are outlined in law (race, sex, religion, ethnicity everywhere, sexual orientation in some states). So, a gay person could be fired because they're gay and have no recourse there.07/07/2015 - 7:27am
Infophile@Goth: See here: http://www.snopes.com/politics/sexuality/firedforbeinggay.asp for a good discussion on it. Basically, the problem is that in the US, most states allow at will firing, and it's the burden of the fired person to prove the firing was ...07/07/2015 - 7:25am
Goth_SkunkAssuming that's true, then that is a fight worth fighting for.07/07/2015 - 6:58am
Yuuri@ Goth_Skunk, in many states being gay is not a protected status akin to say race or religion. It's also in the "Right to work" states. Those are the states where one can be fired for any reason (provided it isn't a "protected" one.)07/07/2015 - 6:07am
Goth_Skunkregarded as a beacon of liberty and freedom that is the envy of the world, would not have across-the-board Human Rights laws that don't at the very least equal those of my own country.07/07/2015 - 5:47am

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician