Citation 916 SW.2d 909.196, Tenn.109.
Two school girls planned to poison their school teacher. However, their plan did not go through when one of the accomplices decided to inform another teacher concerning what they intended to do. These girls were Reeves, Coffman and the teacher was Janice. The two girls went further and planned that after killing Janice, they would drive her car into the smoky hills. Reeves and Coffman sought to include Foutch in the scandal by persuading her to drive the stolen car. However, when Foutch learnt about the evil plan, she refused to be part of it. When the day came, Coffman carried the poison in her bag ready to fulfill her plan of killing Janice. Coffman felt excited and shared the plan with another student; Christy. Christy did not like the idea and went to report to Cockrill, another teacher at the school, after she was shown the poison. Teacher Cockrill reported the matter to the school principal.
That morning, the targeted teacher, got into class and notated clearly that the two accused girls were leaning on her desk. The girls giggled when they saw her. She noticed a purse next to her tea cup. After a short time, the two girls were summoned by the school principal. An inspection by the principal revealed that rat poison was in Coffman’s purse. The accused were then sent to the sheriff investigator to give their statement about the allegations. The juvenile court in Carroll County found Coffman and Reeves guilty. However, they appealed against the ruling in the Carroll circuit, but were found guilty of attempting murder. The circuit court made its ruling and sentenced the girls in the department of youth development.
Reeves and Coffman were found guilty of second degree murder, a crime that violates the Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 19-12-101.
The constitutional, legal question indicates: do the girls’ actions sum up to second degree murder according to the new laws. Yes, because the girls would have killed the teacher if their fellow student had not reported the case. Secondly, they had planned, and were ready to execute the plan. They had also intended to steal the teacher’s car. Therefore, the teacher’s life would be no more if the school authorities had not been notified about the crime. The law had taken its own course since the defendants were minors and were charged in a juvenile court. The girls were also sentenced in a youth development. It was reflected that when the girls saw the teacher enter the class, after they had put the poison in her tea cup, they giggled. This indicates that the defendants were conscious of their actions. However, questions arise as to why the jury did not consider the reasons behind those actions. Children cannot plan and execute such a crime to their teacher if they are not hurt. There must have been an influence that made the students develop negative emotions against their teacher. This should, therefore, be considered so as to give a fair hearing or judgment on the case. Such loopholes in the case suggest or cause one’s disagreement with the ruling.
Nevertheless, this case is significant to the enforcement of criminal law. It helps to communicate that people should abide by the law regardless of their age. It encourages students to embrace the rule of law despite their age.