They Should Have Let the Police Handle It
(“Payback,” Forensic Files)
Bobby Kent was described at best as an Eddie Haskell type, ingratiating to parents and teachers and snide to his peers.
At worst, the 20-year-old weight lifter was a sadistic bully, alleged to have sicced an attack dog on his best buddy and sexually assaulted two other friends.
Instead of going to the authorities or telling their parents, three of Bobby’s associates decided to end the abuse by killing him. They recruited four more people to assist in a crime that became the subject of a Forensic Files episode as well as a paperback and a movie.
The tale of the seven middle-class Floridians ages 18 to 20 who assassinated Bobby Kent in a remote Broward County spot near the Everglades on July 14, 1993, still fascinates the public. Here’s an update on those involved:
ALICE “ALI” WILLIS
DOB: 8/29/75
Relationship to Bobby Kent: Former girlfriend
Appearance: 5-foot-3, hazel eyes
Status: Released.
Having served six years of a 40-year sentence later reduced to 17 years in a minimum security facility, she is free and now calls herself Alice. After moving to Palm Bay, Florida, she picked up a charge for retail theft in 2013. It was a probation violation, but it didn’t land her back in prison. A year earlier, she appeared on a Dr. Drew show, where she was introduced as the mother of four children. The Sun Sentinel reported in early 2018 that she lives with her husband and kids in Melbourne, Florida. Incidentally, Alice told NBC Miami that she has not stayed in touch with the other conspirators.
MARTIN JOSEPH PUCCIO
DOB: 03/01/1973
Relationship to Bobby Kent: Best friend from childhood
Appearance: 6 feet, 202 pounds, brown eyes
Tat: Bulldog with a human body
Status: Serving life in Desoto Annex in Arcadia.
A judge reduced Marty’s sentence from the death penalty to life. His prison profile lists his status as in close custody, which means he “must be maintained within an armed perimeter or under direct, armed supervision when outside of a secure perimeter,” according to Florida’s Inmate Orientation Handbook. It’s the second strictest category, right behind maximum, which is reserved for death row inmates.
LISA CONNELLY
DOB: 07/31/1974
Relationship to Bobby Kent: Best friend’s girlfriend
Appearance: 5-foot-3, brown eyes
Status: Released.
Connelly served 11 years, part of it in community custody, meaning she stayed outside of prison at times but was monitored. She exited jail for good in 2004. Lisa lives in Pennsylvania with a daughter from her relationship with Marty Puccio and a younger son, according to the Sun Sentinel. During his Forensic Files interview, Lisa’s cousin Derek Dzvirko mentioned knowing Lisa’s daughter and that she was “smart” — so maybe she’ll do a better job of picking friends than her mother did. After having trouble landing jobs because of her record, Lisa turned to self-employment, becoming a certified optician and running a cleaning business, according to a 2013 Sun Sentinel story. She has kept a low profile since her release, and appeared in shadow during an interview with American Justice on the “Payback for a Bully” episode.
Amazon
Barnes & Noble
Books-a-Million
Target
Walmart
Indie Bound
DONALD SEMENEC
DOB: 07/15/1975
Relationship to Bobby Kent: Dating his ex-girlfriend, Ali Willis
Appearance: 5-foot-4, 190 pounds, blue eyes
Tats include: “Skull w/dishonor”
Status: Serving life in Gulf Correctional Institute in Wewahitchka.
Don expected a sentence of no more than 22 years but instead got life because he “delivered a stab wound to Kent’s neck that started the homicidal frenzy,” according to a Sun Sentinel story. He is serving his life sentence with no mention of parole eligibility. According to a 2013 Sun Sentinel piece, Donald has accrued 20 infractions in prison, including possessing a weapon and drug and alcohol use.
DEREK DZVIRKO
DOB: 11/02/1973
Relationship to Bobby Kent: Sketchy. He’s Lisa Connelly’s cousin.
Appearance: 6-feet, 237 pounds, green eyes.
Status: Released.
Dzvirko, who reportedly helped carry Bobby Kent’s body to the water’s edge, confessed a few days after the murder and led police to the crime scene, according to NBC Miami. He testified against the others in a plea deal and served six years in minimum security. A Florida Corrections Department profile notes his nickname of “Quarter Pounder.” After exiting prison in 1999, the beefy ex-conspirator worked as a truck driver for a while. He lives in Missouri as a single father of one, according to the Sun Sentinel.
DEREK L. KAUFMAN
DOB: 05/08/1973
Relationship to Bobby Kent: Sketchy
Appearance: 6-foot-3, 220 pounds, blue eyes, shaved head
Tats include: Female grim reaper, alien head
Status: Serving life in Gulf Correctional Institute in Wewahitchka.
As far as victimhood, Kaufman didn’t really have a dog in the race; there’s no mention of Bobby Kent’s ever hurting him. He reportedly got involved in the murder plot because he liked hanging around with impressionable teenagers. He told the conspirators that he belonged to the Mafia and would provide a gun. Instead, he produced a bat. “It wasn’t as bad as the judge said,” Derek’s grandfather Sam Kaufman said at Derek’s sentencing, according to the Sun Sentinel. “A dumb kid, that’s all.” Derek is not serving his time quietly, having committed 18 infractions in jail, including drug use and disobeying orders.
HEATHER SWALLERS
DOB: 05/04/1975
Relationship to Bobby Kent: Sketchy. Friend of a friend.
Appearance: 5-foot-2, blue eyes
Tat: “Love” across four fingers
Status: Released.
Heather got a light sentence by pleading guilty to second-degree murder and testifying against the other conspirators. She served 5 years in minimum security and lives in Georgia with her children, according to the Sun Sentinel. Although she was present during the murder, it sounds as though she had the smallest role in it out of the seven.
As far as Bobby’s parents, at the time of the sentencings, Farah and Fred Kent reportedly felt that justice had been served.
In a Sun Sentinel article from May 12, 2013, however, Bobby’s 41-year-old sister, Laila Kent, condemned the decisions to let the three girls and one boy (Derek Dzvirko) out of prison:
“It disgusts me that they have freedom after killing someone. They’re horrible people and they should be ashamed of what they did. They don’t even deserve to be alive.”
The American Justice episode is no longer on YouTube or Daily Motion, but you can watch it on Amazon Prime.
That’s all for this post. Until next time, cheers. — RR
Watch the Forensic Files episode on YouTube here or here. Note: It’s one of the few episodes of the original Forensic Files narrated by someone (Peter Dean) other than Peter Thomas.
Amazon
Barnes & Noble
Books-a-Million
Target
Walmart
Indie Bound
Thanks, RR, for the update. Good to see that some of the group appear to be upright citizens, though it remains to be seen whether their parenting is decent (given that some of their parents seem to have had a rather casual, indulgent attitude to their children if sources are correct).
It remains disquieting that one or more of the girls may have got off lightly compared to the boys.
A potential significant angle is the question of whether Puccio could reasonably (have) claim(ed) mental and/or physical abuse by Kent as providing extreme provocation for his (shared) murderous actions. ‘Bullying’ has become more of a societal and legal issue since this case, and I suggest that now Puccio might reasonably expect mitigation against a life-sentence if a jury believed, from his and others’ evidence, that he was regularly hit, belittled, and coerced into doing things he would otherwise not (the porno stuff) by Kent. If I were P’s lawyer I’d certainly push this. It can never excuse what he did, of course, but insofar as the abuse is true, it provides some explanation, and in so doing a scintilla of justification for mitigation. In this light, a life-sentence, particularly when others were also involved and were punished relatively lightly, seems a little harsh, particularly given his youth.
The 20-plus years he’s served seem like enough, especially because, as you point out, bullying really hadn’t been identified as a social ill back in 1993, and he probably felt there was nowhere he could turn for help.
That’s no fucking excuse. I’m sorry I am completely against bullying it’s fucking disgusting, but with that all said there’s tons of kids who get bullied and do you know what they do? They either go to an authority figure or they learn how to fight and whoop that ass and then it stops. You dont fucking kill someone especially the way they did that was first degree murder and was a cold hearted act, they all are truly evil ppl and they all deserved to rot in a cell for the remainder of their days, becuz the ones that are out and about rn and living life, who know what’s going on in Bobby’s life rn? Death and that’s for life.
He definitely deserved to get at least beat with the bat a few and maybe jumped by them, but I think they did take it a little too far with the knives. Also they woulda been good if no one snitched
I think you mean they took it too far by KILLING him!
Amen brother
You have to be nuts to go to those extremes ! Scary as hell. I know my ex set my apartment on fire with me in it simply because I broke up with him and bottom line I wasn’t going to support him anymore. I was in cardiac arrest when the fire fighters found me in the blaze. There are some real sicko’s out there. I was with the sociopath for 13 years and never suspected he was capable of such horror.
my ex wife did the same thing to me
We only think we know what those we’re close to are, and aren’t, capable of, and the realisation that we were wrong could be devastating. FF shows in most eps what the vic(s) never imagined those close to them could contemplate, let alone do (though there are a few exceptions where the vic did have presentiments of tragedy: http://forensicfilesnow.com/index.php/2019/09/13/barbara-stager-murderer-and-spendthrift/ ; perhaps some of the slow poisoning cases).
NOBODY deserves to get beaten with a bat- no one!
The MURDER of another human being can never be justified as “they took it a little too far.”
If no one “snitched,” they still would have eventually been found guilty by forensics.
Absolutely – and as for snitching, they were far too dumb to’ve escaped undetected. Their destinies were formed as soon as they formed the idea to kill…
how about Adolf hitler? did he deserve to be beaten with a bat?
Hard cases make bad law.
Oh bs… pedos they deserve it. Get off your high horse. Bobby Kent was a pos.
agree.. I disagree with the life sentences in this case too, because no one is in danger of being murdered since Bobby Kent died. None of the 7 are actual “sick minded” killers. They are normal people like all of us (who aren’t murderers by nature), who happened to get involved too deeply in the situation. I think Bobby Kent got what he deserved. Not saying the 7 didn’t deserve SOME prison.. but life??? Marty Puccio, Donald Semenec and maybe even “hitman” Kaufman (who was revealed to be a big story teller and braggart) pose NO DANGER to the general public and should be set free.. My gosh, it was 30 years ago.. they probably prevented more bullying. Imagine the kind of father Bobby Kent possibly could have turned out to be. I imagine Bobby Kent would be HORRIBLE to his hypothetical wife and children.. was probably a pedophile his damn self.. FREE MARTY PUCCIO!!
AGREE! An eye for an eye is my motto!
Yea pedophiles deserve it, EACH AND EVERYONE ONE OF THEM!!! Kill a pedophile, save some child’s innocence. It should be a slogan on billboards, t-shirts, bumper stickers, business cards, milk cartons, print ads, even sky write it!!
Good riddance Kent asshole jerk. You were a real piece of excrement..evil to THE core. Hope You are rotting in hell.
Bullied has not been proved even if he was bullied..to conspire and get a group of that size together with multiple weapons then lure the victim to a secluded spot with premeditated murderous assault is no mitigation there….
Let’s not forget that victim Bobby Kent was the same as the murderers age and his fate is for eternity!!! So let’s stop worrying about Matthew getting a life sentence was so brutal nightmarish torturous multiple people attacking this man from front and back he’s laying on the ground they’re slicing is throat bashing his head in with a metal baseball bat and you want to be concerned of the murders age and if he was bullied…which is all bs and excuses they trying to come up with but even if they were he was bullied what they did was evil pure evil
It’s Marty.
You need to do some fact checking. It has been proven that he was bullied. And there’s no Matthew. I’d suggest researching a topic before making comments on it.
No, it hasn’t. ‘Bullying’ isn’t an offence – and certainly not a criminal one – and was not considered in court for judgement; the court’s only concern being whether, and to what degree, the accused murdered Kent.
As I’ve made plain elsewhere, that they alleged bullying is neither here nor there: even if it were true – and ‘bullying’ needs defining: it’s NOT a crime!!! – it was IRRELEVANT to murder as it could never amount to anything near justification. And in any case the ‘they would say that, wouldn’t they?’ adage would apply. Bullying – howsoever defined – would have to have been TESTED in court; it was not.
All notions of ‘bullying’ need to be removed from consideration here. It was murder that is illegal and that was the court’s sole consideration. Bullying was NOT ‘proved’ by any stretch of the imagination.
Calling what he did bullying kind of white washes the whole thing. He wasn’t just a bully. Bobby was an abusive, woman beating rapist.
Who says? Was he charged with/convicted of rape? Ditto violence to women? Of course the perps would say that: they need mitigation. But where’s the evidence independent of their claims?
Furthermore, are you arguing that this justifies premeditated murder – ‘cos if not it’s irrelevant? And any such claims in court were regarded as irrelevant too, so I’m at a loss as to what your point is.
Mine is clear and simple: he was unquestionably killed by these perps; it was murder; there can be no justification (logically nor morally) for murder. It was NOT self-defence and was not regarded as so by law and jury.
The overwhelming, huge, vast majority of sexual assault or rapes aren’t reported, and if they are, they don’t get prosecuted – and if they do, they don’t result in many convictions. You can’t say “he wasn’t charged with or convicted of rape, therefore he wasn’t a rapist”. I don’t doubt that he did sexually assault women. And those women would realistically never see justice (I don’t know a single woman who has been sexually assaulted who even saw an arrest, let alone justice.) I find it credible that the guy was indeed a garbage human being in general. However, beating and stabbing someone to death in a group murder party isn’t about how awful HE was. Choosing to execute a group homicide is all about how godawful the murderers are, independent of the trashiness of the victim.
He died way to easy! Should have tortured him for awhile first.
I aplaud your opinión. Bobby WAS a monster a real piece of shit
He RAPED several of them including Marty and rape IS a crime. So stop making excuses for his evil behaviour. He was clearly a nasty piece of work. Yes the murder is horrible and brutal and shouldn’t have happened but the guy clearly deserved some karma. The fact is if he had not stabbed whilst in the act of raping them as he did instead they wouldnt even be locked up now — they’d be free as it would be, self-defence against a assailant. The fact is they held their feelings and hatred for what he had done to them and instead and did this pre meditated is why there in jail
No it shouldn’t be removed…it’s the motive.
Agreed.
Meh. Mr Marcus Do Right. The obese abused were kids, and hey, they lived in Florida, which is a handicap in itself.
All they ass was dumb and his best friend was a coward. He should have beat his ass listen to his stupid ass girlfriend then why get ppl in. The shit should had kill him by yourself and the one who out smh. I’m sorry they all should get life in prison. That what they get killing somebody and running they damn mouth smh.
They all didn’t kill him. You don’t know jack about the case…or law. Have a seat.
A little too far hahhahahahhahaha.
Kent was a punk who had it coming…and probably a closet-case, too.
He may have had trouble coming – but certainly not premeditated murder. He may have been a closet-case (assuming that means largely gay), but the evidence more likely suggests bisexuality (if he wasn’t entirely hetero). In the latter regard, Puccio too may not have been quite 100%…
This was an egregious crime, worthy of more than the throwaway “he had it coming.”
What does him being gay got to do with it? I’m straight and married, but those who have strong feelings against gay people, should ask themselves exactly why that bothers them so much?!
Oh, god yes! Bobby Kent was a classic closet case who internalized it manifesting itself in anger.
You are so so damn right. Bobby Kent was a piece of garbage who fully deserved what he got. He was a spoilt brat who believed he could mistreat belittle anyone he wanted to. Good riddance piece of turd! You are surely rotting in hell…
An absurd opinion. You’re not required to be particularly sympathetic to the victim (though that would be decent) but you are required to acknowledge that (i) this was planned murder, (ii) murder is appalling, and (iii) he has grieving family. At least the murderers get to see theirs. Put yourself in the place of a murder victim’s parents before you say what you do…
Dude was a rapist.
I was bullied for years when I was little. This one particular bully made me cry in front of 3 girls when I was in 3 rd grade. Long story short, I started martial arts a year later and in 10th grade kicked the crap out of that same bully from 3 rd grade. It felt great to see him at the pep rally with a black eye. Justice was served as far as I was concerned
Sweet revenge — love it!
i agree – they were just sloppy – they should have planned it out better.
Yeah but you forgot to mention that there are kids who go to their high school and kill people I guess that you haven’t been watching the news the past 5 years because they have been happening pretty much every year but I agree with you that there is no excuse to kill anybody but if he got bullied then they should add that as a reason for him to maybe get off the life in prison that he has and maybe give him a chance to early release — that is how I feel.
Thomas: We largely agree, then. Some commenters here seem ignorant about what the court was doing. If was not concerned with WHY they murdered, only WHETHER they did, and then who did what so relative (as there were several) culpability could be ascribed. The putative reason for the murder – the motive – is largely tangential, in that it may help to establish that they did indeed commit the crime (though note that motive isn’t necessary to establish guilt, as in many cases it will be speculative, even ‘motiveless’, as with the perp who randomly attacks someone ‘for the fun of it’).
It was entirely irrelevant that they claimed bullying, for the simple reason that there CANNOT be a justification for murder. No other indictment was possible in the circumstances. It wasn’t accidental, negligent, nor self-defence but the clearly premeditated intention to take a life.
Only at sentencing can ‘mitigation’ (and aggravation) be considered, after it’s already established that murder was committed. This is where the defence might posit the likes of ‘bullying.’ Note that, contrary to what one recent commenter states above, there was not and could not be a ‘finding of bullying.’ Some evidently make it up as they go along… Bullying per se, because it means different things to different people, cannot constitute mitigation and is not a crime. Like a ‘battered wife’ who kills her husband and claims mitigation, evidence is needed (witness/police report/hospital report/photo of injury etc) – and note that the accused cannot themselves be witnesses for others of the accused, such that each could be deemed to try to reduce culpability for the other (in this case by all claiming they were bullied).
So, it matters not what any or all of them claimed as to bullying if there’s no independent evidence. And, of course, had they taken the reasonable course instead of murder and reported the claimed bullying they might have such evidence… which wouldn’t now be needed as they’d likely not’ve committed the crime because Kent would’ve been dealt with! Yet some commenters here can’t see this wood for the trees and absurdly and appallingly claim the perps were justified. Goodness knows what planet they’re on…
And even if evidence was posited and accepted, what response could the law reasonably make??? ‘Well, we can’t condone murder but we accept you felt compelled to kill this man because of his bullying – though we would add that this isn’t a license to murder someone you think you have reason greatly to dislike in the expectation of a lesser punishment.’
Vigilantism necessarily cannot be legally justified and is at BEST morally dubious – not that there is that best case here: this was plain appalling – spoiled brats deciding another spoiled brat needed ‘offing’.
I totally agree. The lighter sentence for the two (boy and girl) who weren’t as involved makes sense but they should at least have done 10 years, however great they testified against the others. The others should not have got less than 30 – 40 years with exception of the ones serving life. Don’t let them out ~ they took the life of a kid who otherwise most likely would have grown into a decent responsible adult, he just needed professional help for anger issues. Horrible, absolutely horrible brutal crime. Keep em locked up and throw away the key.
I totally disagree! An eye for an eye!
Diana you have a very poor understanding of the principle behind an “eye for an eye.” In this case it would imply Puccio punching him. Perhaps Willis raping him, but not murder as Kent didn’t murder anybody.
I aplaud your opinión. Bobby WAS a monster a real piece of shit.
Got what he deserved, period.
Fuck that. He should be killed for bullying. Serves him right
Really? Bobby Kent will be dead forever beacuse of these people. They all deserve the death penalty.
Kent got what he deserved…the others should be free
Why – they aided and abetted? Why should one take all the blame?
I could give you a proverbial play by play…..I’m familiar with the situation that was preceding….. I am well aware of Derek Kaufman and Marty…including Robert….it was the Carmel Lake/Ives Dairy Rd clique….including the California club shopping center… aventura and lehmann plaza……countyline billiards…..to skylake shopping center…… I regret not counseling them against their intentions….I however got jumped by Robert’s little gang after being asked by Derek Kaufman if I would back them up at county line billiards should a fight break out….when I saw the parking lot confrontation begin….I went out to see what was up….unfortunately Derek and their people were afraid so they absconded leaving me to contend with the Kent clan
… I got hit with the pool sticks they ran out of the venue with…personally
…I felt that bitch ass Bobby should have been dealt with differently….but I would have figured that his demise was inevitable…..eqapoise deca durabolin sustonon….does create an aggressive mentality….Olympic gym was notorious for the distribution of steroids….
They should all be released…..asshole Kent was a wannabe gangster of aventura and leowmanns plaza….he and his bitch ass clique did try to bully a bunch of people….his demise was inevitable…..the kids that caused his death wasn’t smart enough to get it right…. I don’t know if any of you are from nmb…. but I lived in the California club at 10th ave and Ives dairy rd….and the escalation of the issue of Robert Kent was embellished after hurricane Andrew…..too much time to play gangster and hero because of the steroid distribution Bobby was trying to do….so….he wanted to be a mafioso…..Marty thought Derek was a mafioso….and they all lost……I do believe that all their sentences should be commuted to time served!
William,
I completely agree with you! Kudos, they should have given them a parade!
Yes he was bullied but Puccio was also a big bully Even in Forensic Files the journalist states that Marty Puccio took part in bullying other gays and the impaired grocery store worker. Kent was a bully and they could have just stayed away from him. People that had no reason and were never bullied by him took part in taking a human life. If it was one of your family members you wouldn’t feel that they should get light sentences. I’m especially angry that the women were released early. Especially Lisa Connelly. People agreed that she was the brains and the initiator behind the murder. She should have served life along with the rest of them.
Lol @ “brains.” Did you read the book about the murder? None of those people seemed all that smart about the world in general.
Murdering someone is just wrong and a stupid answer to anything. And to run around and tell everyone afterward just compounds how stupid it was. Hell, even at 18 you know that. Yet, that’s exactly what they did.
The girls ended up with lighter sentences because they didn’t actually do anything physical. You can talk about killing someone all day long but actually doing it is something else completely. No one forced any of those people to do what they did.
Just because they didn’t do anything physically, it was premeditated. They were all part of a conspiracy and should have received harsher/lengthier sentences. Evil!!
Agreed: they were thick as shit. But there’s a caveat over Connelly’s sentence. She was found not to’ve injured Kent, but there’s suggestion that the murder was her idea and she encouraged the killer(s). IF true and evidenced, she’d have got more time (it may be true but evidence was lacking). The person who ‘hires’ the killer is typically treated in law as as culpable as the actual killer…
Jaye, not quite correct in principle. The person who plans or arranges the killing (hiring a killer, say) is in law as guilty as the murderer. There’s contested claim as to whose idea the murder was, with some claiming it was one of the girls (not established in court) – but ‘actually doing’ the murder is not necessarily any worse than planning/arranging/encouraging in law…
I think most would agree with this. If I hire a hit man to kill you, is there any significant difference in moral responsibility, even if I couldn’t have brought myself to pull the trigger? I’ve merely replaced myself with someone who will… Some philosophical argument here is possible – but for purpose of law it has to be like this, as everyone who wanted someone dead and had the money would simply hire a killer, knowing the killer would get the greater punishment if caught.
The idea and encouragement for Kent’s murder may well have been (I think it’s speculated) Willis’s, but that’s harder to prove than who did the actual killing, so in the end it was those who seemed to the court to have contributed to the actual death (Kent was struck by a number of people) who got the greater punishments – the males.
YJL: I absolutely agree with you against – astonishingly – those who claim Bobby ‘deserved’ death, that the ‘victims’ could simply have steered clear of him, told his parents, or even the police. To suggest that murder is somehow justified is appalling and outrageous.
Interesting that Puccio may have been bullying as well – which supports my contention that steroids (the body-building stuff) may have addled his brain, as it can. Also interesting that he may have been ‘anti-gay’ given he was involved with gays on the fringe – permitting a number of interpretations.
Agreed too that Connelly got off lightly relative to Puccio, given the evidence that she ‘sowed the seed’ and encouraged the killing. In fact the men generally did worse in sentencing – but this was a joint enterprise and it seems there should have been greater parity of treatment. I hope she thinks about this every day…
This is sad to see. I remember the episode as I knew both Bobby and Derek back in the day. Hung out a little more with Derek but not much. However, wow is all I could say then and it’s all I could say now. So glad I didn’t chill with them on the normal as neither were good people, but back then I was just another street junkie. But that’s what he gets for claiming to be some bad ass hitman. He is right where he belongs. There is no forgiving murder.
HD: Yes; the only people who could forgive are Bobby’s parents. It’s not in anyone else’s gift… While I hope for their own relative peace of mind they are able to, that this was a premeditated, very nasty killing makes it particularly hard – though murder is murder however it’s done, and so perhaps is always equally difficult to forgive…
It may feel strange to you having known some of the ‘players’ in this awful business (and seeing them depicted in film)…
Why did the boys get life? They were very young and 100% punishment is never good! They should have been getting counseling and a skill to get a job and they should be released. To do 20-25 yrs is enough for the crime. If Bobby Kent was as evil as he was, literally controlling and forcing homosexual sex on his “friend” are mitigating circumstances and should have been a factor in deciding their fate! Yes a murder happened but the life sentence when a person can’t vote, are a teen, this is not the way! Jury convicts on popularity sometimes and not justice!
‘If Bobby Kent was as evil as he was, literally controlling and forcing homosexual sex on his “friend.”’
That’s pure speculation and certainly cannot constitute mitigation. Kent may – or may not – have ENCOURAGED Puccio to engage with the gay scene, but there’s no evidence that he FORCED him. How could he? Whatever Puccio did he did willingly (which is not to say that he’d have done it without Kent) – which is all that matters legally. There’s no evidence that Puccio engaged in gay sex; rather, it appears that, with Kent, he was content to try to make money out of flaunting himself in dance/soft porn contexts. It is speculation as to whether one or both men were bisexual (given that they engaged in heterosexual sex too), and whether they was some at least latent mutual attraction.
If, by force of my personality (which is what you imply), I convince you to join me in, say, a bank robbery, it’s not mitigation for you when caught that I was able to convince you to do it / persuaded you. The fact is you made the choice to – period. If you did it under DURESS – I threatened you or loved ones, say – that would be a different matter. But there’s simply no evidence that Puccio did the ‘gay stuff’ under duress… And I could go farther and ask why he shouldn’t do/be gay (rather than have to be “forced”)? There are plenty of ‘bi’ men and women. These two could have been too…
I agree with you 100 %. The boys have served more than enough time.
Bobby made his best friend a monster. He paid the price with his life.
Totally agree with you. Seems that him and the “hit-man” were given the harsher sentences. It doesn’t seem fair that he was not looked at as having been victimized and not able to get a lighter sentence seeing as how he was abused far longer, and far worse than Ali (Allice) Willis, whom was given ultimately 7 years based on her defense as having “battered woman’s syndrome” from a 2 week relationship with Bobby. Meanwhile, Marty was abused for many years, 11-12 years!! (Since 3rd grade, allegedly — he was 20 when the incident occurred) but, he didn’t get to use “battered men’s syndrome” or PTSD. As if abuse only affects women’s mental health and not men’s. Smh. Just not fair. It’s not okay, that they did what they did, but considering the circumstances I think THEY felt it was somewhat justified. I just don’t see him being a danger to society and supposedly that weighs heavily on a conviction sentence. It’s bullshit. I know he deserved prison time but, his entire life?! There was plenty of evidence proving that Bobby was a true sadistic bully.
Nakie: “It’s not okay, that they did what they did, but considering the circumstances I think THEY felt it was somewhat justified.”
Care needs taking here: that the perps (may have) considered themselves justified in killing is neither here nor there. Many whose killing’s motivated by ‘passion’ – anger, jealousy, or whatever – would think or claim justification. It matters not a jot that they thought they were in some sense ‘right.’ They were not, and decent, reasonable people, as represented by the jury, determined so. And that’s the point: they were not decent, reasonable people in planning and executing a terrible crime when, unquestionably, there were infinitely better means of addressing a friend/acquaintance they’d come to dislike or hate.
As to the wider question of Puccio’s longevity of sentence, you’ll see I agree. I think 25 years is enough given his relative youth and the shared nature of the murder (which isn’t to say I feel any sympathy for any of these horrible people).
Bobby raped both Ali and Lisa. Look it up. He got what he deserved!!
They SAID he did. But they would, wouldn’t they?
Have you ever been bullied or raped? I bet not. He got what he deserved. Many people who have been bullied or raped never tell anyone. They often kill themselves. Is that ok? Should they have killed themselves? You must be a lawyer. You obviously have never had to deal with that kind of stuff. Maybe you were another Bobby Kent?
Again, this is coming from someone who is commenting like he was there to know how everything went down. Since you think you know so much, why don’t you give us all a play by play of their lives of every moment?
AE: PS This report, for example, states that the rape claim was lies:
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:HZ9X-ONJG8AJ:https://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/fl-xpm-2013-05-11-fl-bobby-kent-where-now-20130509-story.html+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk
Certainly there’s no proof for the claim.
Are you in the habit of believing the unsubstantiated claims of defendants trying to justify murder, or do you base your ‘knowledge’ of the case on the film? Whatever – you’re wrong.
More justified is Kent’s sister: ‘”It disgusts me that they have freedom after killing someone,” said Laila Kent, 41. “They’re horrible people, and they should be ashamed of what they did. They don’t even deserve to be alive.”‘ They ARE horrible people.
As for Kent’s sister, she need to own the fact that her brother was a monster and probably would have eventually killed someone.
Not saying he deserved to die, just saying he had a hand in his own death and his sister should own that before spewing such hate for the killers.
Russ: “… her brother was a monster and probably would have eventually killed someone.” There’s no justification whatsoever for this suggestion. Nor did he have a hand in his own death, if you mean that his murder was partially justified. Not according to judge and jury, whom I think were correct.
Kent may well have been unpleasant, nasty, a bully, or whatever (although the perps were still friendly with him – which needs explaining if he was SO awful…) – but lots of people are, particularly selfish, immature ‘teens. You’re saying, then, that it’s either OK to ‘off’ them – because some people don’t like/hated them – or the victim partially deserves it and this is mitigation. And all you have is the perps’ word about the victim’s behaviour, even if their claims could in principle justify their act.
That position is dangerous nonsense. Ask yourself if your (nasty) sibling made enemies of the group s/he hung with and was lured to a place and killed, if you’d maintain it was deserved/understandable/worthy of sympathy for the perp(s). No – you’d be horrified and call it murder, ‘cos that’s what it is.
I’ve been reading all of these responses… Marcus, just curious here, are you 1. A lawyer? 2. A former bully? 3. A victim of a bully? I only feel comfortable asking because you have so much to say, and with strong convictions… personally I’ve been a victim of bullying and eventually learned how to deal with it (first having a friend defend me then fighting the guy and we called it done). I also was called a bully by an old school mate from HS at a party recently (which I felt shock and shame ). … If Bobby Kent raped the 2 women, I wish they would have pressed charges. He would have served 5-10 (hopefully) in prison. As for Marty, once they got older he was the same size as Bobby… he could have learned a few moves and given him a proper ass kicking.. I don’t feel Bobby Kent deserved to be murdered… and I say that as a man who feels rapists should be punished severely, maybe even killed. But by the law, not in that way. Again with Marty if he truly was bullied by Bobby for 11 years, that can drive anyone mad. But maybe he didn’t have a family member help him do the right thing.. idk the whole story is sad… disturbing… disgusting
Bravo Serpaderp!
How do you know he wasn’t a bully or he was a rapist? How do you know he didn’t do those things? Were you there? Cause you sure act like you were there in the same room to know his every move.
I agree with you to a point, but many go through what he went through and handled it better than plotting a murder. I went through my first 2 years of high school getting my ass kicked in the gym locker room by a senior that was twice my size. Yeah I wanted to kill that guy, but there are always better options.
Roc: We appear totally to agree – not to a point. I’m saying that they had choices (all murderers do!), and made the worst, most terrible one. They deserve no sympathy whatsoever (though I think Puccio should now be paroled if he’s behaved).
If you bring back the victim from the dead, then maybe parole Puccio. The victim’s sentence was death and you think that Puccio should get a chance to live life out of prison.
Only on consistency’s ground. Many murderers serve much less than life, but principally because he was one of a number involved and the females are out, and he was young. There are very many murderers worse than Puccio.
Yes.
Bullied has not been proved even if he was bullied..to conspire and get a group of that size together with multiple weapons then lure the victim to a secluded spot with premeditated murderous assault is no mitigation there….
Let’s not forget that victim Bobby Kent was the same as the murderers age and his fate is for eternity!!! so let’s stop worrying about Matthew getting a life sentence was so brutal nightmarish torturous multiple people attacking this man from front and back he’s laying on the ground they’re slicing is throat bashing his head in with a metal baseball bat and you want to be concerned of the murders age and if he was bullied…which is all bs and excuses they trying to come up with but even if they were he was bullied what they did was evil pure evil
I agree: bullying needs to be defined even before it can be considered to be in question; and it was NOT in question in court for the good reason that even if it were established it couldn’t possibly justify premeditated murder. The perps sought no legal means of addressing his alleged bullying – just straight to murder.
It’s both outrageous and depressing that posters here attempt to justify or mitigate the crime, seemingly impervious to law and decency. This is possibly because they know less of the case (fact) but more of the film (fiction), thus explaining the constant reference to bullying per eponymous film.
I agree with this analysis. The woman who plotted the murder is out & the other women are out. Seems like a horrid double standard. Puccio, who actually had reasons to do Bobby Kent harm, appears to be an angry lifer who, IMHO, should have been paroled.
It was a truly shocking crime but Bobby Kent, from all accounts, was a monster.
JM: The problem is that ‘all accounts’ are largely from from the perps with a vested interest in painting Puccio as a monster, so their accounts can’t be taken as read.
Fuck all these useless to life germs. They each and all need to be executed in mid of street and scraped to curbside for trash day.
Bobby Kent deserved to die!
I agree with you. I always thought that his sentence was way too harsh from the get go. He did have some mitigating factor. He is eligible for parole after 25 years so hopefully, he’ll be paroled soon. That being said, he did deserve to go to jail, what he did was horrific, but he was very young and bullied, so maybe 20+ years is enough? In any case, he does deserve a second chance. Also, in comparison, the women of the group really got off easy.
I completely agree. I can’t believe his lawyer didn’t bring all the abuse Marty took from Bobby. It doesn’t give you the right to kill someone, but seeing no way out can affect you mentally. I was surprised that he got the death penalty in light of all the physical and mental abuse.
I agree — there are mitigating factors.
I love the tat descriptions. I’m not likely to ever turn to a life of crime, but one of the reasons I’ve never gotten a tattoo is I’d rather err on the side of caution when it comes to identifying marks. The fewer, the better.
Much easier to change a hairstyle than eradicate a tattoo!
I’m appalled at those of you who think these kids shouldn’t still be in prison for the murder of Bobby Kent. They all could’ve chosen to simply stay away from him. Bobby could’ve changed his ways at some point in his life but that was and will always be taken from him. They had no right to make that decision to kill him. I feel deeply sorry for his family.
Hello Shanon,
I largely agree with you — except that some played a greater part than others in Kent’s death, so that needed reflecting in their sentencing, and, in terms of consistency, rightly or wrongly the concept of provocation (in this case, forms of bullying) is used in law, so that, for example, a ‘provoked’ murdering spouse can and sometimes does receive mitigation. This concept also applies within the perpetrator group: Some may have provoked others to agree to or commit the crime, thus bearing greater responsibility. Provocation that would cause a reasonable person to act in the heat of passion — a state of mind where one acts without reflection — may result in a reduction of murder to voluntary manslaughter. In this case, though, the murder was planned, so provocation in this strict sense doesn’t apply — but those who received the lesser charges probably benefitted from mitigation for provocation. Of course, your point — that ‘victims’ could simply walk away — is the counter-argument. They all should have walked away, and if Puccio was assaulted by Kent, he had recourse to the law. Instead they committed a terrible crime from seeming moral degradation: sex, drugs, cheap thrills, and, possibly absentee/indifferent parenting. A tragic case for all involved — most particularly Kent and his loved ones.
You reap what you sow. They all got what they deserved. The ones that did less time will also reap. All thugs. White trash.
Rare: Agreed!
I agree — what a nightmare for his family to lose a son and have to hear him being trashed, too. The kids should have had some kind of intervention where they told him to stop with the abuse or they were going to authorities or at least to his parents.
Lol he was a rapist, what a nightmare that he’s dead.
You’re wrong. Explore the details. He was a horrible person. Maybe didn’t deserve to die but he should have been in jail. He sicked his dogs on him and beat up retarted co workers! The people that are in jail deserve to be too but NOT life! Kent would have ended up in prison eventually.
Puccio was just as big a bully as Kent. Even the journalist on Forensic Files said he bullied other gays and the grocery store worker.
Chris: Kent’s character’s not in question here. He may well have been horrible. But we’re not remotely justified in murder because we disapprove of someone and/or he’s horrible. It’s entirely beside the point that he may eventually have been incarcerated or whatever (as otherwise may Puccio and the rest of the ‘white trash’). No-one here expressing horror at his murder and murderers is “wrong”.
Kent got what he deserved…all the others should be free
I’m sorry but everything I’ve read and watched on Bobby Kent…is he was a horrible human being a narcissist, a closeted gay that took his steroidal aggression out on his beat friend he was clearly in love with and hated him for it. Murder is bad yes. But, I dont feel bad for him. They should all get a chance at a life since they were all so young and oh so very dumb.
T: But you can’t kill someone ‘cos they’re horrible, closeted gays (and if Kent was gay, it’s likely Puccio was, though their orientation has nothing to do with the issue)!!! Universalize that principle and the homicide rate for the ‘removal’ of the horrible, narcissistic boss, the teacher, the doctor, the professor, your neighbour whom you perceive has bullied you, would increase ad nauseam.
Why should “they all get a chance at life since they were… young and… dumb.” So was Kent – but he didn’t get that chance!
I hope you can see that you’re approach is not only unconscionable but contradictory. If we, as an individual or group, decide who lives and dies, there is no law but anarchy – quite apart from the morality of the specific act. Of course, too many citizens DO make this decision – one they are highly likely profoundly to regret…
I agree Kent displayed classic homophobic behavior by a young tough realizing his own attraction to other men. Particularly his best friend Puccio. He realized he was what he claimed to despise.
All the more reason acceptance and tolerance of homosexuality is needed and welcomed in modern society. In 2020 perhaps even Kent with all the progress the LGBT community has made “may” have been more accepting of himself!
Very true — that, plus today’s anti-bullying movement, could have prevented much of this.
I think the dynamics between ‘bully’ and ‘bullied’ render this more complex than you suggest. Puccio, a bulked-up man himself, continued his association with Kent from childhood – he kept going back; and this despite both sets of parents disapproving of the friendship (Puccio’s ‘cos of Kent’s abuse; Kent’s ‘cos of Puccio’s being a dropout).
Clearly there was some kind of love-hate relationship between the two, irreducible to simple perp-victim. Authentic bullying victims don’t willingly go back for more – so it’s entirely unclear if Puccio considered himself as a ‘bullying victim.’ There may have been some co-dependency, some sexual dynamic, further complicated by mutual steroid use changing behaviour. Ali ?, Puccio’s short-term g/friend, said he physically abused her, so why they were together only for weeks.
So it’s entirely unclear that, as much as Puccio ‘hated’ Kent SOME of the time and was undoubtedly hurt by Kent, Puccio would have wanted to seek help as a ‘victim’, for (i) his own behaviour is sometimes questionable; (ii) there may have been some kind of sado-masochistic relationship between the two (unconsciously or not) that kept them together – one that could not be addressed or faced by Puccio when that relationship attracted other friends’ attention, such that it was the easier option to go along with their suggestion to kill Kent.
This is, of course, speculation – but I suggest that the perp-victim ascription is also… I’m sure I’m not the first to suggest that their relationship resembles, externally, that of the battered wife, who doesn’t go to the police and keeps going back when he apologises and says he won’t do it again. That behaviour LOOKS like bullying, and in some respects it is, but in others it’s quite different…
RR: Absolutely – why not ‘gang-up’ as they did, but instead of murdering him, tell him that they all hate his behaviour and unless he changes they’ll walk and report him for abuse where applicable. They chose the evil option and fully deserve the consequence.
You are kidding, right?! Have a talk with him? Bobby Kent was a bad guy. So far, in this comments section, only his sister likes him.
Well, it’s either that and/or report him as the only two legal and reasonable options for trying to change his behaviour. What would you do (apart from murder)? But it’s not even clear that they wanted it changed. Despite complaining of how horrible he was they appeared to continue to keep his company – and Puccio did the gay stuff with him. It’s both simplistic and convenient that AFTER they kill him they attempt to explain/justify per his being a chronic bully… Why wasn’t he simply dropped by them like a stone? I suggest because the matter’s not nearly as black and white as is typically portrayed by them and their sympathisers…
Let’s all have sympathy for “Kent…”
Were you there? Did u know them?
Chris: Well, yes – because no-one is entitled to take the law into his own hands, and to decide what the punishment should be… and certainly not to punish ‘bullying’ with murder.
IIRC Connelly did a DNA test and discovered that her daughter was Kent’s and not Puccio’s.
It was confirmed to be martys…not bobby’s
Where’s your source? I also have read she did a dna test that proved Bobby to be the father.
Not true. Put your real name up if your going to make bold talk.
I’m sorry, but I’m a parent and if my child was treated the way Marty was by Bobby Kent, I’d have no sympathy for him or his family. They raised a monster who inflicted demoralizing abuse on his best friend and I’d question how and why he developed into the evil he was. I feel bad for Ali, Marty and Lisa, and Marty definitely doesn’t deserve to still be in prison. The people who participated in the murder that never knew Bobby are murderers but the others are victims, and how can anyone feel bad for a person who sells his friend to another man, makes disgusting porn videos and beats and berates his only friend?
I agree with you. marty and others all deserved to serve a lengthy sentence but enough is enough…marty should be out by now…he’s a changed person with no prison violations and a preaching god to other inmates in jail and has a daughter needing her dad.Throwing away the key to a man that has changed and is no threat to society is wrong. This is a case of severe bullying and should have had considerations on that in trial.
“…and how can anyone feel bad for a person who sells his friend to another man, makes disgusting porn videos and beats and berates his only friend?”
You make a number of assumptions here.
1. There’s every possibility there was a sexual dynamic between Puccio and Kent;
2. How do you know Puccio was a passive participant ‘sold to another man’ – a victim rather than willing player?;
3. Some claim that Puccio himself bullied others (a distinct possibility if on steroids for bodybuilding, given their notorious effect);
4 Who says Puccio was forced into porn?
Without contrary evidence – and the perps’ claims in court are unreliable as they needed to establish that Kent was a bully, abusive, etc to justify their appalling action – it must be assumed that Puccio was willing, even if gullible.
There is NO justification for murder and NO justification for sympathy for the perps. That said, the females got off too lightly, and there is some ground to consider parole for Puccio, being a joint agent in the murder, and quite possibly not the instigator of the plan – perps in other cases having served less for more culpability (in my view).
I’m reminded of ‘The Lottery’ by Shirley Jackson. The bully got what he deserved by a jury of his peers.
Jenn:
1. No-one really knows how Kent behaved – neither you, me, nor anyone who wasn’t in court to hear evidence (and even then we only have the defendants’ perspective on it, with its biased potential). You say what you do based on your *received* view – which is wholly inadequate. That’s one of the reasons we can’t have ‘mob rule’: people deciding for themselves that someone needs ‘punishing’ and that in this case that will be death.
2. No-one is entitled to decide they’re justified in taking another’s life. Why bother with law if not so? This was not self-defence but premeditated murder.
3. Is taking another’s life proportionate to their bullying?
4. As a parent, would you ‘understand’ if your bullying child were murdered by a gang because of it? Would you have expected the alleged victims of bullying to have reported it to you and/or the police rather than simply murdering your child?
Your position needs reassessing…
As far as Kent’s behavior- yes, there were plenty of other kids who substantiated some of the accusations about his treatment of others, especially Marty. I’m not saying they were right to kill the guy though. But there were plenty of kids around town- several not really friends with any of the ones involved- who witnessed some of the abuse.
Touche.
When a tribe is under threat from a predator, guess what? They get rid of the predator (be it beast or man).
A principle in moral reasoning: you can’t get from an is to an ought. Whatever some do in fact is unrelated to what they ought to do. If it weren’t so, we could dispense with the law as pointless. Yours may be a law of nature, but it’s indeed that of the beasts.
On your reasoning, if Kent’s ‘pack’ sought revenge on Puccio’s via their mass-murder, that’s just fine… because it’s just what they do!
you obviously need to go and live in the real world where your words and ideals don’t work very well. I would much rather get rid of a predator bully than worry about them getting me. Call me crazy but their rights are not more important than mine and my wellbeing.
J: You’ve set an Aunt Sally up (a person or thing set up as an easy target for criticism). Where do you get predation from??? That’s something you’ve contrived. There’s no claim that Kent was a predator, nor that anyone who chose not to associate with him was harmed or threatened. He was part of the group – a friend – that turned on him because they came to dislike him, claiming his bullying. He was not, as you imply, ‘hunting down’, and there is no suggestion that anyone’s life in the group was threatened.
You suggest that if you merely perceive threat (however mistakenly), you have a right to ‘get rid’ of it (him). You don’t, are answerable in law, and in a case such as this you’d be rightly be sent down for life (or possibly death in another state). And think on: if someone you love was somehow regarded as a threat to life because one or more of his/her former friends termed him a ‘bully’ and killed him, would you think that right and proper in the ‘real world’ you occupy – the one Kent’s family daily experience…? Yours is the law of the jungle: that of teenage killers who hold a grudge over an acquaintance and enjoin their friends to ‘off’ him. US prisons are full of teenage murderers who, far from living in your real word, occupied one of corruption and fantasy (drug-induced?) in which murder was the fitting response to disagreement, frustration or anger.
This story is oddly addictive. Saw the movie bully when I was little one summer night. Movie stuck with me all my life up until I learned of the true events. Marty should write a book.
There is sooo much to this story people do NOT know! Please stop slamming and research! The courts were wrong and so was the police. They just wanted to make name for themselves! SO sick of most people thinking they know so much! Until you have been beaten within an inch of your life do NOT judge the reaction of someone who was!
A: You’ve replied to your own post. As you aver that both police and jury ‘were wrong’ (whatever you mean by that), what’s to research? Is the public s’posed to have some further insight than those who investigated, tried and judged the facts? You suggest that you do, and you imply that Puccio et al were justified in their actions. That’s a matter of opinion only, not of fact amenable to ‘research.’
The great majority of the public would not support the mob rule that occurred here, where a group decided for themselves that they would take a life (for bullying, violence, or whatever) – perhaps, even, for the ‘thrill-kill.’ There were effective legal means of stopping whatever it was they disliked (and that itself remains unclear): ceasing contact; reporting to Kent’s parents; reporting to police. Assuming the worst – that Kent was an aggressive, violent bully – that cannot possibly merit death.
Lisa Connelly in my opinion was the main character in play. She set it all up and she is now free. If she was a man, she would still be in for life. She may have stuck the knife in him cause it was her plan and her choice to recruit the others who could’ve walked away but didn’t, and got what they deserved too.
Kent was a punk. He got his. So did everybody else. Puccio should be out in two. He did the crime, he did the time.
Snitches end up in ditches, bullies get got. Make sure you are a good parent, and your kid is not a bully. It’s not rocket science. Broken people come from broken homes.
“Make sure you are a good parent, and your kid is not a bully.”
… or a murderer…
They paid much too high a price for finally getting rid of a bully. Telling the police or parents isn’t an option since none of them can protect them from the bully striking in retaliation.
There should be a ‘bully law’ where it can be proven that someone is constantly terrorizing people, then they have a right to defend themselves.
Society needs to stop protecting the predators more than their victims. The main teen violence here came from the bully.
JJ:
1. On the contrary, HE paid much to high a price (for being a bully).
2. Who says he was a bully? They do (and the author of the book). And they would, wouldn’t they?
3. What is a bully? Someone they didn’t like (but still socialised with)?
4. Who says he was terrorizing them? Why did they, or some of them, continue to associate with him if he were?
5. Society didn’t “protect the predator” – he was murdered!
6. Society needs to protect individuals from murderous gangs…
You’re assuming a great deal about Kent’s behaviour that you have no evidence for – the claims of those who needed to justify and minimise their murderous actions. Not that such claims even if true could possibly justify murder.
Are you suggesting vigilantism instead of recourse to law in all cases where retaliation is a potential? That way lies chaos.
I’m not saying all these kids were white trash, but I bet none of their parents knew what their kids were up to. I grew up back then, when single parent homes were on the rise. Back then if you did not have money, you did not go to college. Sounds like this is a classic case of the “Have vs. the Have nots.” If these kids had money they would have been dealt much lesser sentences. Public defenders will only take you so far. These sentences were not fair. Overzealous prosecutors and police kicked and bullied a bunch of poor kids because they could make examples of them and names for themselves. If those kids had money and proper representation they would have pled out for reduced time. Puccio should be out. He was a victim and those mitigating circumstances were not stressed enough in court by his lawyers. Those two others are lost causes.
Will: That they were from poor homes or not is conjecture, and, moreover, irrelevant to the moral assessment of their actions, if not to their sentencing. That the US legal system – justice – is so predicated on money is sad and regrettable, and while better representation MAY have affected the outcome for one or more of them it doesn’t change how we should appraise their actions. However unpleasant Kent was – and there can be no assumption about that: we don’t know – a gang of youths premeditatedly murdering him cannot be sanctioned nor ‘understood.’ Period. That was properly the view of the jury too (who heard the evidence – you didn’t). Sentencing tariff is another matter. They may have been too long, too short, or about right, as that’s largely not a matter of jury decision. Opinions will vary. But there can be no legitimate variance concerning the profound wrongness of their actions.
Ask yourself what you would think as a father if your son were murdered by a gang (who lured him so to do) and afterwards told you ‘Well, we decided he was a bully. OK..?’
For one thing I would not allow my son to be or become a bully. People have a right to defend themselves and counting on parents or police to protect them not only doens’t always work but can actually incense the bully to become much worse. He was warned and had time to change his ways, now he’s gone to Jesus for repairs….hopefully. Repent or pay the price, Heaven will not allow predators in and he, not his victims, was the predator.
Marcus, I appreciate your opinion. It is a good one at that. If a little guy (Kent) was picking on my son (6’1″ Puccio), he would have had his butt handed to him many of times. So, unfortunately your scenario does not apply to me. For you to assume Kent was not a bully is wrong. We need fewer bully sympathizers. It is not ok to turn the other cheek. We need fewer government employees trying to further their careers at the less fortunates fate and hands.
BINGO !!!
jj: The Lord has harsh words for murderers (inc ‘vengeance is mine’): everything you say could be applied to the defendants and then some. People do indeed have a right to defend themselves morally and legally – but that doesn’t extend to murder, esp when there’s no evidence their own lives were at stake. “He was warned and had time to change his ways”: was he and did he? How do you know?
God wouldn’t thank you for appropriating Him for your argument…
“Repent or pay the price”: I’m glad we agree about something, if not about who does the repenting…
I have a natural right to protect myself and my neighborhood. It’s the predators who should be afraid, not decent citizens who are fed up with being the victim of bad people and bad laws that protect them.
jj: You certainly don’t have a ‘natural right’ to take a life, in a premeditated manner, ‘cos you dislike someone, merely feel threatened, or perceive them as a bully. And you won’t find many citizens agreeing the law’s bad and needs changing to your version, replacing the frying pan with a cauldron of gasoline. Although having already rejected recourse to law, what would you change to make relevant law ‘good’ (apart from condoning vigilantism)? You’ve not made the crucial distinction between reasonable, legitimate DEFENCE of the person (minimum force to overcome the threat, for example) and OFFENSIVENESS, where (far) worse is done to the perpetrator than s/he did to the ‘victims’.
Per previous discussion, how do you know bullying was involved? Because the defendants said so? They would, wouldn’t they? And yet they associated with Kent over a significant period. As if no teens have ever murdered an acquaintance for no reason other than that they simply disliked him/her at that particular time… Here’s a case illustrating just that, and very similar in form to the Kent case:
https://www.monstersandcritics.com/smallscreen/grave-mysteries-spotlights-horrific-murder-of-seath-jackson-by-amber-wright-and-michael-bargo/
Now, what’s the difference between Jackson and Kent?
Because MANY witnesses and victims said so. Maybe you should have lived with him for a while, easy to talk when you’re far removed from the threat. I do not ‘retaliate’ for no reason and neither did they. They took care of an ongoing worsening problem that parents and authorities failed to do so. Really, live with a neighborhood/schoolyard like I had to and you’ll likely sing a different tune when you’re victimized a few times. Predators beware, you will sow what you reap. Taking him out doesn’t make them like him any more than taking out the garbage makes you garbage.
Will: I’m not assuming Kent wasn’t a bully – what constitutes alleged bullying would need to be clear, which it isn’t to us – but nor can you assume he was, as you do. But whether he was or not isn’t the point; it’s the murderers’ action which is. What if one or more of THEM were bullies? They certainly became so that night on the beach… How else would you characterise a group luring one person to a remote spot to stab him to death??? Nothing I’ve said or implied suggests I’m a bully sympathiser. I sympathise with anyone (and their loved ones) who’s been murdered (as I do the victims of bullying – but not to the extreme point of disproportionality you do).
I believe your mistake, with respect – and it’s one not a few make on this site – is (i) thinking you know better than the jury, despite there hearing/seeing the evidence, not you; (ii) assuming the defendants were ‘railroaded’ (poor defence) merely ‘cos you disapprove of the sentencing; (iii) aside from defining ‘bullying’ (is it just what the defendants said it was?), assuming Kent WAS a bully, based on… what they said; (iv) suggesting the gross disproportionality of death for bullying.
As an aside, my understanding is that at least some of the group could not be described as ‘poor white trash’: they were largely from lower/middle-class households affluence-wise, not trailer-dwellers. But I do think there’s a question over their parenting, being young people engaging in drug and alcohol use and sex and sexual loucheness under some of the parents’ noses. Kent, as a body-builder, may have used steroids, affecting him mentally (just my theory).
My position’s in rejecting ‘armchair jurism’, respecting the jury’s decision because they’re in a more informed position to judge than we, and we have to have sound reason to take issue with their conclusion (which you don’t). At least one defendant’s sentencing appeal was successful – so if you’re correct about railroading, the system reconsiders – but also considered that most were fairly appraised. I do concede that ‘cos of joint enterprise and Puccio’s youth, life without parole seems harsh. A long minimum sentence was justified, but I’d like to see him being able to be paroled after, say, 25 years. The girls seemed to get off relatively lightly.
Would you want your neighbourhood (sorry, I’m a Brit so Brit spelling!) governed by self-appointed gangs who meted out ‘justice’ as they saw fit, rather than reference to the law and its enforcers. The view that in cases such as this self-defined ‘victims’ can with impunity take a life rather than refer to the law is simply indefensible. And if they can do it ‘acceptably’ in this situation, where does it stop? When, if ever, does deciding on your own justice become wrong? One obvious scenario: Kent’s father machine-guns all the defendants dead in court – on the ‘eye for an eye’ ground, ‘cos he decided it was justice. Would that have been wrong (if understandable)?
At least we’ve had a good ol’ discussion of this topic – which is what the site’s about…!
Marcus.
A couple things. First, juries have been wrong in many cases. DNA evidence has exonerated multiple convicted murderers and rapists who were convicted by a jury of their peers over the past few decades. The role of both the prosecutor and the defense is to tell a story to a jury that convinces them theirs is the true rendition. The objective of both is to “win” the case. In many instances the “truth” is not the primary concern of either. Rather, the objective of both prosecutor and defense attorney is to enhance their reputation and to further their careers. The same is true of the police. Their objective is to gather evidence and organize it in such a way that it will lead to a conviction. There is always much conjecture on each side, what might be called “creative” license. Rarely is the “actual” truth represented in a court of law. Also, there are influences and pressures on juries that don’t foster a true verdict – vis-a-vis the O.J. Simpson trial, and more recently the Derek Chauvin trial in Minneapolis. In each of these trials it is naïve to believe the jury’s verdict wasn’t in some fashion influenced by forces outside of and not relevant to an unbiased assessment of the “facts” of the case.
Second, what is called an “open and shut” or a “slam dunk” case often is not. This particular case involved the corresponding motives and actions of seven individuals, each with their own histories and relationship to the victim, making for a much more complex scenario than it seems on the surface. Police and prosecutors tend to focus on the “who, what, when and where” of a case, while the defense often focuses on the “why.” In this particular case the facts that there was a victim, he is dead, and that seven people were involved in varying aspects of the outcome was pretty much undisputed. This is when “why” becomes important in determining the various culpabilities of the accused, not in relation to guilt, but to just punishment. Intentions here are important, and difficult to prove or disprove unless there is a public record of abuse and battery. In the end it boils down to whether or not the judge and jury find an accused credible or not.
You mentioned in one of your replies above that the Bible says “vengeance is Mine, says the Lord.” The Bible also says, “Do not be deceived, God is not mocked; for whatever a man sows, this he will also reap”(Gal. 6:7). Also, “…whatever you want men to do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets” (Matt. 7:12). Clearly, along with your passage, these admonitions did not influence either the accused or the victim. Such is the nature of a society that has dismissed the objective truth of the Bible and elevated the post-modern relativism of our age. Obviously, sound Biblical teaching to all parties concerned throughout their lifetime may have resulted in a very different outcome. And, yes, I am a Christian.
Finally, as you and others have pointed out, premeditated murder is always wrong. Nor does this fact abrogate the guilt of the victim for crimes against the accused. It seems to me the discussion really boils down to whether justice has been done, or still remains to be done. The answer to this question surrounds whether one believes a man (or woman) can be rehabilitated, reformed and become a productive member of society again after such an egregious offense. As reflected in this discussion, there are differing viewpoints on this question. Jesus was once asked how a rich man could possibly enter heaven, His reply is the same as mine: “…with God all things are possible” (Matt. 19:26).
I actually went to school with 3 of the conspirators imvolved. Lisa lived in my part of town and was bullied heavily not only by Bobby. Marty was actually quite chill and sort of desperate for acceptance and Kent was a cocky show off. This shocked our community when it happened. May God have mercy on their souls. People often forget that death is a very permanent thing, bully or not he did not deserve this. To claim he did is from a lack of emotional maturity and adult logic. I do keep in touch with one of those involved from time to time.
“THEY SHOULD HAVE LET THE COPS HANDLE IT”
Yes but in the real world the cops can’t be there all the time to protect his victims, especially when he retaliates for reporting him. The system is broken because it does not do nearly enough to protect victims and punish the offender and I know this through personal experience. For example: Many women have been killed by someone with a restraining order against them.
jj: It may well be true that the legal system and police do, or can only do, too little for victims – but what this lot did (i) isn’t the answer because it’s illegal (and for very good reason); (ii) was grossly disproportionate (something you persistently fail to engage with: they could have beaten him up, for example).
“Because MANY witnesses and victims said so.” How do you know? You weren’t in court. Where do you get that information? What the ‘victims’ said I’ve already covered (as did the jury): they would say that, wouldn’t they? Who wree the many witnesses? What would YOU say when in court having murdered someone you disliked? Certainly not ‘I hated him,’ but ‘he abused me; he bullied me.’ QED.
“I do not ‘retaliate’ for no reason and neither did they.” As you were neither a witness to the planning and murder, nor privy to their mental states you cannot claim this.
No – however provoked I was by ‘a bully’ I would NOT resort to murder. I would do what the vast majority of decent people do and involve parents (as appropriate), the law, and failing that, move.
“Many women have been killed by someone with a restraining order against them.” This is a false analogy. 1. They chose to associate with him – precisely NOT seeking distance, as in the restraining order case (indeed, they were associating on the murderous night). 2. And many people – inc children – have been killed by those who merely disliked them. 3. There was no evidence put that Kent was a murderous threat. The defendants were too stupid even to make that up. It cannot seriously be suggested that because someone who’s unpleasan and physically aggressive (with his fists, not weapons) might at some point in the future decide to try to murder one or more of his ‘friends,’ they must gang up and murder him first… just in case.
You’re clutching at straws.
Go have a nice chat over a cup of tea with some ms-13 boys. Easy for you to talk when you’re not the victim.
jj: Even if your argument were in some sense sustainable – it isn’t – it’s entirely abstract, for you and anyone who followed your principle would be convicted and imprisoned if caught, like Puccio probably for life (and possibly for death in a DP state). Thus you’ve gained nothing and possibly lost everything… That’s just one of the problems of taking the law into your own hands (aside from the moral question).
Thus although you might say that you wouldn’t have the courage of your convictions (to do what this lot did in similar circumstances as you see them), it’s dangerous thinking.
It’s no easier for me to say I would under no circumstances do what they did than for you to say you would, is it?
In the end, as you’re impervious to counter-argument, I can only say ‘go tell it to the judge’…
Take a Logic course…
Marcus, from the way you write about this article I wouldn’t be surprised if you were the victim’s family.
I feel the legal system wasn’t as mature at this time and bullying wasn’t even a topic. Things were different in the US around the time of the murder.
Thank you! Finally someone is pointing out a very important factor. Things were very different back in 1993. Bullying was a hot topic, and if you went to the police to report high school bullying, they would most likely have told you to take it up with the school or the parents. And there were no phones back then, so you couldn’t just make a video of it for proof.
Also, real life isn’t like the movies or television. All this, “stand up to a bully and they will back down,” talk is mostly nonsense. Sure, it might work on occasion, but more often than not it isn’t going to work and it will only make things worse. Usually the kids that are bullies are the biggest and strongest for their age, so standing up to them simply isn’t realistic.
This case is messed up from so many points of view, and everyone involved has some issues. But those expressing profound sympathy for Kent and his family are out of line. Yes, murder is wrong and they took it too far, but let’s not pretend that Kent was a saint.
I agree, getting help to ward off a bully was a lot harder back in the 1990s. And before that, it was even worse. When I was growing up, many people considered bullying the victim’s fault for not standing up to the aggressor. A bully attached herself to me in 8th grade, and I had no idea how to get rid of her.
Rebecca: Be that as it may, the logic of this line of argument is that of ‘little or no choice but to murder him.’ I don’t THINK that’s your position – so what’s the point in the observation that it was ‘more difficult’ to deal with bullies then (and so one has to take this course of action)? It’s not relevant to the question of their guilt, culpability, etc – unless you’re implying that is IS. Either it was ‘justified’ or, per legal finding, it was murder (and therefore totally unjustified). There isn’t a middle-way here… Could you perhaps make your position clearer, unless you intended tacit sympathy with the perps (as the person you’re replying to does)? Just out of interest!
To be clear, there is no ‘their actions were wrong BUT’ in the court’s finding. None of the perps received formal mitigation (deduction in time) because it was found they were bullied (which is why the bullying claim is just that – an untested claim (which is not to say that it was an unjustified claim: we don’t know)). In the interest of clarity, perp-sympathetic commenters need to state if they think the court’s finding was wrong. If they don’t think it was, argument of the kind you express is irrelevant.
I think the bullying should have been a mitigating factor in Puccio’s sentencing. He was at one point so desperate to get away from Kent that he begged his parents to move.
Rebecca: Thanks. Some have claimed in these posts that Puccio was also a bully, though it unclear what the evidence for that is. It is plausible as an effect of body-building steroids, if he was on them. The there’s the gay porn thing – another complication. Some have claimed he was ‘forced’ to engage with it by Kent, which I don’t buy. Did Kent apply unwanted sexual attention on him (the hitting incidents being a form a sexual sadism)? We don’t know, but if so that could have incited a desire to remove himself.
My sense is that the relationship was more complex than merely two friends or acquaintances – one of whom bullied the other. Because of the added facets of the sexual dimension and possible steroid use inducing dysfunction (in both) I aver that it makes it harder simply to assert that one bullied the other. One could want, for example, to move away from a former lover (not that I’m suggesting they were): there’s no necessary implication that bullying was the cause, even if a convenient peg to hand one’s animus toward the other.
Given the above, I don’t blame the court for thinking that while there’s claim of bullying there’s no unequivocal evidence – just the opinion(s) of the accused (who would say that as justification). A police, school or hospital report (of bullying/injury/rape) would be different, otherwise why should we take the word of people in whose interest it is to claim it? Is it fair to give them the benefit of the doubt? I can’t see why…
Dan: Hello; no, I’m nothing to do with the case. I maintain that it goes without saying that you cannot punish (alleged) bullying with murder because (i) of the obvious disproportionality; (ii) that you act as judge, jury and executioner; (iii) that one person’s bullying is another’s playfulness; (iv) that it opens the way for any subjective ‘reason’ to be given for taking a life: race, sexual orientation, political belief. This should be so obvious as not to need arguing – but it seems it’s not and it does…
Bullies are usually cowards and a taste of their own medicine can do wonders on slowing down their propensity to pick on people. I’m certain the guys involved could have just kicked his butt instead of killing him and seen a change in his attitude, and no one would have been in jail or dead. Someone mentioned steroids as an ignition, which is probably true.
George: Hello. Kent and Puccio were, it seems, into bodybuilding, and one or both may have used steroids – a common problem within this activity – which may well then have induced both aggression and paranoia: well-known side-effects. I worked in a male prison and saw plenty of such examples. So Kent’s claimed aggression – we can’t say with certainty he was a ‘bully’ – may have emanated from this, and if Puccio were ‘using,’ he could have experienced paranoia that Kent was ‘after’ him…
There are some foolish comments in this thread by others (who think they know better than the law, jury and judge), light on fact but firm on opinion (as if sound judgement can be made sans fact…). We simply don’t know that Kent was a bully – not least because that needs defining – nor whom of all the perps he allegedly bullied. What he did to whom is central to judgment about his character – though in the final analysis, however unpleasant he was (and I don’t doubt he was – but maybe some of the others were too) murder was wholly unjustified. On that day the ‘victims’ became the ‘bullies’ with a terrible finality. The steriod issue is just one more relevant factor that’s overlooked by some but we can only speculate over.
Why does it say Heather Swallers is Lisa’s cousin?
Thanks for writing in — just checked my sources and it might be a misread from a newspaper story. Will fix.
Hi Marcus, There is a syndrome called shared madness, sometimes called Folie a Deux, that can be transmitted from one individual or individuals to others. This could be, at least partially, the explanation for the people that didn’t even know Bobby Kent to become involved in his brutal murder. If true, Bobby ‘picked on’ Marty since the 3rd grade, which would have likely preceded steroids. I agree, steroids may have escalated the issues later tho. They do affect your personality.
George: Hello. You may very well be right about the ‘shared madness,’ and I’ve seen pics on the tinterweb of Puccio and Kent looking very big and ‘pumped,’ so steroids may be in issue.
I don’t doubt Kent was a bully (however one defines it – physical, psychological, or both). But the gang who shared in murdering him, perhaps through that shared madness, themselves became bullies, doing something far worse than Kent ever did. This seems to be lost on some commenters, who suggest he had it (murder) coming to him and that the perps are hard-done-by.
Steroids, which seem a routine part of the bodybuilding world, can be very dangerous because of the grave psychological toll they can take, and certainly here in UK they’ve been cited by coroners as instrumental in people’s violent deaths… Induced paranoia is a particular feature – one which could well have applied to Puccio, then ‘shared’ by the others, as you suggest (though the film attributes encouragement for ‘revenge’ by Puccio on his girlfriend and Puccio himself as something of a pawn in her hands…)
I think Puccio should be considered for parole, potential mitigation being steroid use (if applicable) and the likelihood that the crime would not have happened without the others’ encouragement and participation. I’m wary of using ‘being bullyed’ as mitigation as it could license ‘revenge’ for so many perceived sleights (And in its psychological form may be unverifiable). There are far worse perps with life sentences than Puccio…
Check into Ali Willis on facebook. She has a public profile. She legally changed her name and has been married for almost 20 years but she has a public facebook under the Ali Willis name. She is doing quite well for herself and runs a business now.
Thanks, Karen. Notwithstanding that at least some of the girls seemingly got off too lightly relative to Puccio, it’s good that this woman’s been able to make a decent life for herself after this awful episode.
This is only my opinion but i suspect Bobby might have been sexually attracted to Marty and at some point started molesting him. i find Bobby’s obsession with the gay porn quite strange. i read the Tropic news article. it states when Bobby and Marty first met Larry Shafer they told Shafer both Bobby and Marty were gay lovers.
Not only that, i read before Bobby would have sex with Ali he’d bring out porn flicks forcing her to watch the TV screen and if she tried to look away he’d hit her.
i do think Bobby taking steroids affected him mentally and physically.
Nancy: The ‘gay dimension’ in this story’s certainly odd. I Think it unlikely that given the creation of gay porn, and the bodybuilding stuff (sometimes associated with gay culture – ‘muscle Marys’), there wasn’t an element of homosexuality and possible attraction on the part of Kent and possibly Puccio. That they had hetero relationships merely suggests they were, if so, bisexual. It’s certainly known that were closeted men unable to express their attraction directly, it may find outlet in dysfunctional ways, such as beating/bullying the object of attraction (and source of frustration).
So while we can only speculate, there’s certainly support for your view in my opinion. This is, I think, just hinted at in the film…
It’s similar to the movie called “Murder on the Orient Express” where all of the killers were all of the passengers on the train. Though he was a bully, he still doesn’t deserve to be killed.
Aryan: …Particularly if Puccio was ALSO a bully. This isn’t is a straightforward binary issue (Bobby was a bully; Puccio et al weren’t). There’s claim that Puccio was also bullying (no surprise if on steroids). And of course ganging-up with a group of co-conspirators on the fateful night to murder Bobby could be said to be the ultimate act of bullying. So yes, citing bullying as in any way justifying what happened is wholly deranged – but some seemingly are deranged…
He should have just manned up and done it himself if he really felt he had no choice, was a shit show from the jump. One question I ask is why not remove yourself from the situation somehow? I mean if it’s that bad to feel the need to kill this guy to escape being treated in such a way. Bullied is such an over-used term today and really is just another in a long list of things that happen in life and people need to put on their big boy pants and deal with it, people are weak nowadays feeling someone else must protect them, poor me.
Men “bully” their wives, girlfriends, siblings and others, just as women “bully” their husbands, boyfriends, siblings etc. It’s nothing new and will never stop just as other human $%^&* up behaviors won’t, you can have two kids from the same family, one be honest and successful the other a worthless POS killer, Whitey Bulger comes to mind.
Some people are just bad eggs, just as in other species of the animal kingdom, nothing new, you mean pups in the litter, perfect example. Quit trying to figure out why people do things, it will never change them and to think you can is moronic. Just like rehabilitation for prisoners, give me a break, they are what they are for a reason, there are spoiled rotten kids in prison too, that had every advantage some people are just born #$%^&*() up.
Rick: Of course Puccio et al had the option not to associate with him – you’re right. That’s just what they should have done, rather than the truly terrible decision to murder him. It beggars belief… While estimation of the effects of ‘bullying’ vary, and we can’t be sure just what Marty did to Puccio and the others, it does appear that he was physically aggressive – but there’s also claim that Puccio was and bullied himself. All these considerations are summed up in the option you (and I and some others) mentioned: if he was as bad as you claim, why the **** did you (continue to) spend time with him??? (True) answer: we’ve exaggerated his bullying to mitigate judgement against us. We chose to drink and use drugs – all part ‘n parcel of the decision to ‘off’ him. We’re wicked and decided it’d be fun to kill him, and we’re blaming the victim get fewer years…
One word: trash.
Lisa should still be in prison. Manson was in for life because he ordered murders and she did too. The whole group were weak lazy jackasses.
I agree. Lisa got off easy and if it wasn’t for her masterminding this horrible act in the first place it never would have happened. Where is the justice?
Intriguing story that I’ve been sporadically following since the Forensic Files episode and watching the film ‘Bully.’
This Bobby Kent might’ve been a prick to everybody but hell, no one deserves to be murdered. NO ONE. If these murdering fools wanted to make Kent stop being such a bastard, if anything, just jump him. Kick the crap outta him. Give him a nice scare, letting him know that they will not take his bullying any longer. I do not, nor ever will condone bodily harm on anybody… But in my personal experiences, I was able to get a punk bully off MY back by simply standing up to him, baring my no nonsense confidence and willingness to fight the f***er. The bully in question never bugged me again…. I stood up to the jerk. I stood up and he sat down… I made HIM out to be the “weak” one. Because, essentially, that’s how bullies are… THEY and not YOU…are the weak ones. Once you put that out in front of these bullies and make them realize that, they won’t be bothering you again.
Murder, on the other hand, is Murder. Two wrongs don’t make a right. These kids did the absolute, most unforgiving and just plain wrong thing anyone could do to another human being. Murder is plain flat out wrong.
Michael: You’ll see from earlier posts that I agree. It’s concerning that some here think murder was justified (though if push came to shove, whether they’d do it, or encourage others in these circumstances to do it, is a different matter. It’s easy to be an armchair Arnie.)
Murder is, by definition, wrong, so what Puccio et al’s supporters actually advocate is self-defence/justified homicide – only we agree with the court that murder is the proper descriptor, as their action was not self-defence (their life or lives was/were not being threatened/there was no imminent danger) but premeditated, life-ending aggression (by base persons mired in drug-use – trash). They were all trash – very possibly Kent too (as you say, he may well have been a “prick”) – but he didn’t take a life. That makes them far worse than him, but there are fools who simply can’t see this wood for the trees…
PS: I’ve just watched the Dr Drew clip linked in the article. Apart from the fact that these ‘there’s something X wants to tell you’ shows are cheap – even dangerous – the friend the facts (somewhat minimised) are reported to states just what you’d expect her to (how could you do this/let it happen?), and what shocks me is Willis expresses no remorse. This is a snippet: she may do later, but a decent (ie, remorseful) person relating this terrible story would state there and then that they did an awful thing which they deeply regret… Therefore, given that she justifies her luring of Kent to his death by the claim that he was abusive of her, it’s unclear that she IS remorseful.
Almost as troubling is the brain-dead audience who clap (as opposed to apt, dignified silence) the friend for saying she’ll stand by Willis, as though they (i) they know the facts of the case rather than the brief sketch they’ve heard and (ii) agree that it’s right to stand by someone who was party to murder. All this before Willis has expressed any sorrow for what happened. I despair…
I don’t blame the friend for what she says supportively in the glare of the camera/audience – she’ll ask questions later and may come to another conclusion – but has the audience had a frontal labotomy? Since when did standing by your murderous friend necessarily trump their party to murder?
Alice likely shows no remorse because she was raped (perhaps several times) and abused by Kent, and so it’s possible that she genuinely feels no remorse.
Be that right or wrong, are you willing to judge Kent’s mother the same way? When Puccio received a death sentence, she stated she was happy with the outcome because she wanted him to feel what her son felt. The famous ‘eye for an eye.’ So if you are going to criticize Alice (and the other kids, to a lesser extent) for subscribing to this philosophy of justice, are you also going to criticize Kent’s parents for the same?
Roby: How do we know she was raped? Because she said so? Well, she would, wouldn’t she? Did she report it/them to the police? No… It’s the failure to be remorseful – to be empathic – that enabled her to take part in this terrible crime, so I’m unsurprised at her attitude. But it’s a reflection of how dumb she is that she doesn’t even feign remorse for the public in whose bosom she now is, presumably hoping to be forgiven and accepted.
You’re comparing apples and pears in you analogy. Willis murdered, demanding remorse. Kent’s mother didn’t, but would be perfectly entitled to express satisfaction had the death penalty been executed (as many in her situation do). You argument simply doesn’t hold.
Why do you believe what you read in the media? Almost everything written and said was 100% false. Please feel free to text me (321) 522-3277. I will explain but not on this public site.
Hello A: “Almost everything written and said was 100% false.” On this site or in court/the media?
“Why do you believe what you read in the media?” I don’t (without some fact-checking of court reports). I believe what I read in court records (as a record of what was presented), and I appear to think what the jury thought. Are you suggesting that the jury got it wrong?
The jury can only judge on the facts as presented to them, as can the public based on those facts and jury adjudgement. We can’t, of course, claim that what was presented in court was totally accurate and impartial. But what we do know is that Bobby was murdered and that was appalling…
We should all be thankful that they got rid of Bobby. It’s just a matter of time before he would rape and torture other people or people’s kids. I’m sure if it were your kid who was a victim of Bobby, then you wouldn’t want him walking the streets ever again. They shouldn’t have to spend the rest of their lives in prison because of the abuse Bobby inflicted on them or on their friends/family.
I am thankful that there is one less rapist jerk in the world and sorry that they have to sacrifice years of their life to rid the world of Bobby Kent.
J: As future knowledge is God’s reserve, and we don’t execute people for the capital crime they might commit, you claim is unjustified. On the other hand, we have a person, with conspirators, who we know DID commit murder. Enough said…
Marty should be released. In life people get fed up with being bullied. Bobby went way overboard with his garbage and to me people have a right to defend themselves. I agree with a lot of what was said. The world only knows what Bobby could have turned out to be, a rapist sadistic jerk. To me, these kids saved lives. RELEASE MARTY.
While you are correct that our society does not condone people taking matters into their own hands, and this is to preserve and orderly society, your other arguments are completely inconsistent.
You keep stating that nobody knows for sure that Kent was a bully, and yet you are certain about some details of the murder. Everything you “know” about the murder comes from the same source of info that allows us to “know” that Kent was a bully, and an egregious one at that. If you accept the facts of the crime as reported, you have to accept the facts about Kent as reported, and you have to accept that he was a terrible person.
Roby: We know the facts of the murder. “Bullying” isn’t an empirical fact, being a perception of behaviour that may well be reasonable but in this case may equally well be used to mitigate murder. A ‘hermeneutic of suspicion’ is entirely justified. But the question of bullying is incidental, which is what certain commenters persistently fail to appreciate. However bad a bully he may have been cannot justify murder – period. Like the court found, there are no ifs, buts or maybes. This was premeditated murder.
So, I don’t accept inconsistency, because the police determined empirical fact distinct from the claims of the perps; the perps CLAIMED that bullying was a fact. The two are different; the primary sources are different. But the question of bullying is incidental to the fact of murder and was rightly found irrelevant to it. None of the perps were given reduced sentences as alleged bullying victims – and for good reason: because it didn’t substantially happen or because even if it did it couldn’t possibly justify what happened. That’s the law, whether the anti-Kents like it or not.
None of them should have ever been released. It’s disgusting that they were especially Connelly who started the whole thing. And now they all have kids? Makes me shudder! Our justice system is seriously flawed.
It happened in Florida. ‘Nuff said.
Yes.
Wish they would’ve delved more into Bobby Kent’s background and how he was raised.
Bullies are born out of a myriad of reasons. Not condoning his murder, but he, like all of us, is ULTIMATELY responsible for his actions.
I’d suggest your observation’s more pertinent to the perps than the victim… Bullying needs defining, and that definition needs to be applied to the alleged bully per the evidence of his behaviour (the claims of the perps are necessarily tainted by their wish to establish mitigation – not that there could remotely be justification for what they did) rather than taking it as read). Was Kent in trouble at school or with police for aggressive behaviour? This, for example, might be probative of bullying… as it would of others in this sad story.
It is much too simple an approach to dichotomize this murder as about ‘bully and victims’: one, alas, that seems to have been bought into by some, who – appallingly – endorse the perps’ action as justified.
I’m not saying it was right to murder him. But Kent wasen’t only a bully he was definitely an ugly person. Not only did he pimp out his friend, he also raped the 2 girls that plotted in the murder. In those times, the bully awareness wasn’t as popular as today. Look at the records of children commiting suicide because of a bully.
So I assume they felt like they didn’t have anywhere else to turn. Again I’m not saying they did the right thing.
S: You assume too much. There’s no evidence that Puccio was ‘forced’ into the sex stuff. Realistically, how could he be forced to perform in gay bars etc? We don’t know whether they we bisexual and/or were both content to prform for money. Nor is there evidence that Kent raped. Little credence can be given to what perps say to try to justify or mitigate their act. Now, if one or more girls had claimed rape to police beforehand, that might provide both a motive and some kind of mitigation. I’m unaware that any such thing happened.
It doesn’t matter what they ‘felt like’. We may all feel like hurting our perceived or real enemies sometimes – but we don’t. And it’s simply untrue in any case that they had no option: an absurd claim. It’s what the police / restraining / harassment orders are for. And are we really supposed to believe that one male – Kent – could intimidate a group of male and female peers en masse? Rubbish.
No – they simply decided that they didn’t like him so would murder him. They weren’t right; they weren’t neither right nor wrong; and that only leaves wrong (very)! And that’s just what judge and jury thought.
Bobby kent was a bully I think they should have beat him up all together but not kill!!! Nobody deserves to die!!! But, He was a bad Bully treating them really bad!!! Hate bullies!!!
Those kids were on drugs & drugs make you do stupid things!!! Plus the way they acted was so stupid & ignorant!!! Young & dumb!!!
Can’t seem to make up your mind, can you?
RJ: As an illustration of the problematic position you espouse, here’s another FF case, of a police officer who murdered a girl he pulled over:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Cara_Knott
Now, here’s an experienced officer (so older, unlike the youthful Puccio), who’s had two goes at parole, with a third in some years. Why does he get the possibility of parole as the SOLE killer, yet Puccio no opportunity as one of a GROUP who planned and attacked? It doesn’t compute and isn’t fair…
Now, you might aver that no murderer should ever be paroled. Even if that were deemed reasonable we’d be left with the problem of how to differentiate the more and less egregious murderers in their sentencing. As a (mature) police officer at the time, Peyer should very possibly never be paroled. Who wouldn’t discern a difference between the gravity of his crime and Puccio’s? Apart from the above, this woman never harmed Peyer; and while I totally reject the claim of some that ‘bullying’ justified Puccio et als’ behaviour, he COULD claim with some plausibility that he’d been victimised by Bobby – hence a potential small degree of mitigation.
If the Peyers can be paroled the Pucccios most certainly should have the possibility…
It’s a shame that each state can’t seek and establish consensus about how it punishes each type of crime – but while some have the death penalty, others not (and some, I think, never had), I doubt this will ever happen. But if it did, the US would be fairer for it… As it is, state autonomy seems more important.
I spent about 5 years with derek Kaufman at desktop corr inst, and he really was a nice guy. We were cool with each other. They have spent over 20 years in prison and should be freed in my opinion. THE GOVERNMENT KILLS PEOPLE EVERYDAY, AND YOU GUYS ARE OK WITH THAT..
You mean he seemed like a nice guy – ‘cos nice guys don’t do this…
But I agree there’s a good case for parole after 20-25 years – also because the scheming females got off unduly lighty relative to the males, in my view.
So true….He was this wealthy great son and brother in front of everyone, one who got good grades and showed respect. The one who was so respectful to everyone. Then his best friend come over with the girls and drug crew..they part, bobby let loose and take the mask off. He become what these best friends really know him as. Everyone has a dark secret. Hiding something…Bobby showed his real friends his true self. Except he thought of them all as hoes and white trashy people. Being the wealthy kid he thought he was better. Course he get them to bow down to him and treat them like animals. Do whatever he wanted to them because he seen it that way….I just had wished everyone had hung out at someone else’s home, not Bobbys. Ignore him and never deal with him. Again, Bobby be the one that would stalk all of them…make their lives even more horrible. So they just bit their tongue. Everyone on here..Ali was EX of Bobby, not current. She also had another man already and Bobby was doing other girls too. This was basically a man and woman who wanted Bobby to pay..Others just got involved. Sad story all around. Marc was sentenced to life in prison with parole (was changed) and I believe two others are still in there with him. Lisa and others are already out. It’s a sad story. Marc had no one. Not even parents. He moved away and done great. Then moved back into Bobby’s neighborhood and he was crying when Bobby knocked on his door again. After those years. bobby wanted no one to know who he was but didn’t care because he thought of him and others as white trashy people and he could be his true self around that.
One bad decision can change your life forever. You cannot fight violence with violence. Somebody has to be the adult. People should also listen to their children — this wouldn’t happen if just one parent would listen to their kid. Marty was crying out for help. Nobody listened but his teen age friends. I feel sorry for Marty, bullied since five now in jail.
You can’t fight violence with violence? So how do you look at what the u.s. government does when it comes to war in your eyes? Or states that still carry out the death penalty? These kids were provoked. In their eyes they saw turning Bobby Kent in for his abusive actions towards them as to making things worse. If he could be abusive as a so called best friend or lover, what do you think he would be capable of doing after learning you tried to get him in trouble with law enforcement. It is not right what they did but there were obvious reasons why they did it the way the did.
‘In their eyes they saw turning Bobby Kent in for his abusive actions towards them as to making things worse.’ You know that because…?
‘If he could be abusive as a so called best friend or lover, what do you think he would be capable of doing after learning you tried to get him in trouble with law enforcement.’ Speculation. And in any case, how is their position now not far, far worse than anything he could’ve done to them?
The putative reason(s) for their actions are irrelevant. It was murder and murder cannot by definition be justified. At least you acknowledge they were wrong – so I’m unsure what your point is… Either they were right or wrong; justified or not. You’ve correctly answered those in the negative and there’s nothing more to be said that doesn’t compromise of contradict that affirmation: there is no ‘yes, but’.
There are no winners here, just another case of poor parenting and privileged white kids.
First, half yes but if it was privileged white kids then it would not had been several poor white children who killed a wealthy bully like Bobby. The one who put on a front in front of parents and others but took the mask off in front of what he thought were trashy friends. That is why he treated Marc and all the way he did. He knew they were poor white trash. He came from something. That is sad. So when you want to state “poor parenting” Yes maybe…but “privileged white kids,” nope you are 100% false there.
Lisa Connelly is a lard pig. She is a disgusting human being. The only justice is when she goes straight to hell. I feel terrible for her children. Their mother is a psychopathic pig of filth.
Bobby Kent deserved to die; ten times over. Bobby Kent and the Kent family is to blame for everything! The Kent family should be ashamed!
This sorry excuse for a human being, Bobby Kent deserved to die! He was an evil, egotistical, mean, spiteful, abusive, ignorant, sociopath! He bullied people, he thought, were weaker than him. Bobby Kent is a COWARD!! He was such a loser that he had to bully, abuse, belittle and demean anyone that called him out; called him gay. He was gay. He was too much of a coward to admit it. It probably was because of his loser, white trash parents. People like him would have eventually become a serial killer. Those kids, who finally killed him, saved dozens of lives. Bobby Kent would have assaulted and killed others in his lifetime. I praise those kids for killing Bobby. He had it coming. He deserved to die. I’m glad he is dead. They saved the world from evil people like Bobby Kent and the Kent family. Those people deserve nothing good in life. Someday, Bobby Kents’ parents will face God, and will be sent to Hell for all of their sins and their sons sins. Judgement Day. I hope Bobby Kent and his parents spend burning in eternity in Hell. This is all their fault. This killing is a blessing in disguise. We need to be rid of all The Bobby Kents’ in this world!
Bobby Kent was an enemy of the good people, in life. He bullied, exploited, abused, beat up, hurt, belittled, made fun of, demeaned, and threatened all the people in his life. He cruelly abused weaker people, he thought. He was gay and was too much of a coward to admit it. There is nothing at all wrong with being gay. Bobby didn’t even deserve to say that. He couldn’t handle it, so he bullied and tormented everyone who questioned it. Bobby’s parents should be ashamed. They are the reason for this. They are such disgusting white trash, ever. It’s not fair that everyone thinks they feel sorry for this sorry excuse for a man, and his family. They deserve to suffer for what they and their son did to people. KENT IS AN EVIL, BULLYING, COWARD! He deserved everything he got. Shame on him and his family.
You sound as though you knew him and were there in the situation, so certain of his character are you!
‘Distrust all in whom the impulse to punish is powerful.’
Friedrich Nietzsche
That goes both for the perps and for you, T, viz Bobby, and for me viz the perps to a seemingly somewhat lesser extent, since I’m concerned only that they’re *lawfully* punished for the terrible crime they committed…
You might consider whether premeditating a murder by luring the victim to a happy (‘the beach’) place with the promise of a fun evening (including the offer of sex from an amoral female) then descending on him with two knives, a lead pipe and a baseball bat is not every bit as appalling (and far more) as you say the victim was… For, logically, if he deserved this punishment the perps don’t deserve theirs… You might also spare a thought for the parents who knew of the torture their son experienced in the moments before he died from alleged friends/intimates. If you can’t empathise with them, think on your parents if you were the victim, and if you’re a parent, your child…
Hello S: Thanks for your question. I have some academic involvement in law (philosophy of law/jurisprudence), not practicing. If I were a bully I may well be (i) unaware of it or (ii) deny it – though, as I’ve suggested, it needs defining.
Regardless of how strongly convicted I am – or appear to be – about the players’ action in this murder, the arguments people use to justify their assertions should stand or fall on their merits. We can, of course, be deeply convicted… and deeply wrong. And though I understand your inference that I may well have direct experience of that which I speak, I don’t (nor does one need to, of course, to be deeply convicted about whatever). Although I’d say I experienced some bullying at school, I think many would say they had, like you (and we’ve seen the appalling result in the US where the more deranged get a gun…)
We agree about this case.
*If* Kent raped it may well justify extreme anger, but (i) there is no evidence he did, and ‘cos of that the claim of the perps must be disregarded as self-serving, and (ii) even if he had (which is different from perceiving he had) it would make little or no moral difference – and no legal difference – to their premeditated murder. I’d add that rape isn’t bullying but a serious crime, and it may be telling that what the perps disliked about Kent was their perception that he was a bully – but not a rapist, the latter being added for convenience because they knew claims of bullying would – rightly – attract little sympathy.
Part of the explanation for some posters’ foolish comments here is their being plainly based on the film (‘Bully’) – regarded as sympathetic to the perps – rather than the facts of the case as established in court (the only source that matters). ‘Bully’ was soft porn drama for entertainment – the clue to its unreliability as to fact being… drama. Bemusingly, those who appear to derive their impression of fact from ‘Bully’, who claim rape was involved, and who ‘support’ Kent’s death because of, seem unconcerned that the same film depicts them as chronically engaged in casual sex such that the question of where casual, drug-fuelled sex (per Bully) ends and rape begins is a non-question, as though if the girl decides, perhaps after the fact, that she either didn’t want sex, didn’t give explicit permission, or doesn’t remember giving permission, she was raped – an issue the courts face all the time. No means no – but if she can’t recall whether she said yes or no per drugs/alcohol she willingly consumed, and there is no evidence of force, a rape claim can only be progressed with extreme care (such as the existence of witness). Nothing of substance was offered in court and it would have been a travesty, therefore, even to contemplate rape being in question (not that rape – rightly – was in issue for the court, being a red herring).
I accept Kent may well’ve been a scumbag – it’s just that they all were. Those scumbags got to live; Kent didn’t (and a part of his loved ones would die also); so no sympathy should be extended to them.
I think the way Bobby Kent was portrayed in both the book and the movies is a fabrication invented by his murderers to show that he had it coming. The adults all said that Bobby was a polite individual and was a smart college kid who had a B average. I can’t see him terrorizing a bunch of high school dropouts who were more likely to have criminal natures. In my opinion the argument started because of Lisa Connely’s jealousy. Bobby Kent and Alice Willis had a relationship and Lisa Connely tried to interfere. Her claims that she tried to bring them together was a lie. She was trying to ruin their relationship. When somebody told her to shut her mouth and mind her own business she became offended and took her revenge out on Bobby Kent. So she went crying and complaining to that psychopath Marty Puccio and deceived him into thinking that Bobby Kent was making advances at her and that the two of them, who had been friends since the 3rd grade, would sooner or later fight over her. She even made it clear that these phantom sexual advances were unwanted. Nothing could’ve been further from the truth. Bobby Kent was a victim of jealousy. He was not a bully.
I am not sure as to where you watch your information. I know for a fact he acted as nice as anyone would at college, in front of parents and anywhere else. He was a very smart kid. However, Marc, his gf and friends were the only ones who really seen the dark side of Bobby and that is why he is killed. It’s not fabrication. Bobby literally beat the crap out of Marc all the time and raped his girls because he thought of them as trash. He was this college, AB honor roll and respectful kid hanging with these tramps and dropouts. Who would you believe. Bobby was too smart for his own good. That is what got them dummies to break. They just could not take anymore. I seen several things from friends, families and even done interviews. Bobby was indeed a bully.
Im not sure if you knew but Ali was Bobby’s ex…she was already dating the other dude who killed him too.
This is why you need to either tell the police what’s going on, or fight back. Marty could’ve beaten Bobby in a fight, they were both equally muscular. At the very worst, they all could’ve beaten him and left him in the swamp.
He literally bullied them all to his death….Yet the sister doesn’t want to sit back and see it. You can only be bullied so far until you break. Bobby was not a good guy. No killing should have been done. Maybe walking away and letting him be alone. I am sure he would have continued to stalk everyone for it though but least they can say they tried getting away from him. The sister and everyone else needs to see all sides. I believe everyone has served enough time for this. They got punished. Bobby isn’t innocent in all of this. That is why i believe 20 years is enough.
50-60 replies from Marcus saying the ones involved haven’t been punished enough and that the one that was murdered was a saint.
Repeated focus on the ‘gay’ element in it, this guy definitely has a dog in this fight that he isn’t willing to admit. Especially with the vindictive mentions against the females involved.
Justice is shown as balancing scales blindly — it seems that a lot of weight falls on this murdered person as having been a harm to a significant number of people in his community. Law originally came about as a means to allow a community to function without such bad elements causing continuous harm. In the old days, such an element would have been expelled from the community, made an outcast. It’s a pity that no longer exists, as it would have been a better alternative to murder and this group subsequently wasting their lives in prison.
Brutus: You grossly distort my narrative. I say absolutely nothing to defend the victim — much less that he was a ‘saint.’ Rather I defend his right not to be murdered against those suggesting it was justified. Furthermore, I say that Puccio and others should not serve life-imprisonment. So au contraire — they’ve been punished enough. My point was clearly made: that the males were treated more severely than the females and some of the latter got off too lightly relative to males. You’re entitled to view that as vindictive, as are those who view it as reflecting unfair, unequal treatment proportionate to culpability.
Do state what you think the ‘dog in the fight’ is and why the putative dog is remotely relevant to my argument that premeditated murder was appalling — no ifs nor buts. That is, after all, what judge and jury also thought…