A while ago we talked about Daniel Petric, an Ohio teen who shot his mother dead and injured his father after being banned from playing Halo. His lawyers attempted the famous (and absurd) videogame defense — blaming game obsession on the attack. Petric was found guilty, his game defense having been ruled out by the judge.
Lorain County Common Pleas Judge James Burge ruled that game addiction was no defense, and that evidence of premeditation was clear. This also shoots down the defense’s claim that this was a moment of madness, not something Petric had planned to do.
Since the videogame defense is being recognized more and more as something that can lessen the accountability of a criminal, it’s always good to know that not every judge in America is going to fall for such nonsense.
