PSN to SEN: Time to rage quit? - DarkFeed
19 hours 42 mins ago
Remember that story we read in October 2008 about a 17-year-old kid who shot his parents because they took away Halo 3? His lawyers attempted a video game defense, saying his addiction and youth made him less culpable. Luckily, the pleas judge wasn't hearing any of it and tossed the defense.
Petric's defense team admit to his role in the horrific incident but have tried to argue that his youth and addiction to video games mitigate his guilt, meaning he should not be held fully accountable for the crime.
Prosecutors claim Petric, angry that his father had grounded him from playing Halo 3, planned to kill his parents.
However, Lorain County Common Pleas Judge James Burge wasn't too keen on the idea and tossed it as a valid defense, stating that prior calculation was evident.
Additional sources:
- Judge Rejects Video Game Murder Defense for Halo 3 Teen (gamepolitics.com)
Latest comment:
Most recently commented on by on Jan 13, 2009
Most recently commented on by on Jan 13, 2009







Comments
We all know melee does more damage then the pistol >
I'm glad he gets what he deserved. If they let him out, he'll just do it again and blame another game and another until he comes to "Super Mario Bros".
The kid ain't ever getting out
Now that's what I like to hear, a judge with a brain and common sense though this case was a more clear cut one than the others dotted about the place since like the judge stated it was premeditated.
"Video games melted my brain and caused me to forget!"
Thompson-"ARREST THAT CHILD!"
This news story is archived and is closed to comments now.