I find the recent description of 13-year-old Michael Mobley's death as "accidental" [story Jan. 11] incredulous, given the fact that the nature of their altercation was to cause bodily harm to each other.
While the 14-year-old who killed him was "overly effective" or the finality of his actions "unintentional," accidental implies that this student somehow is not responsible for the tragic outcome of the fight. The autopsy showed the violent nature of the brief encounter, comparing it to a rollover car crash. How does this relieve liability on the part of the 14-year-old?
To conclude that this was an accident only reinforces the "victim mentality" thinking that has pervaded our courts and our society too frequently in the past several years.