Kotaku has been following this story closely since it began in early 2008. 16-year-old Daniel Petric, angered at his parents for taking away the copy of Halo 3 that he had purchased against their wishes, shot both of his parents in the head with his father's 9mm handgun, after requesting that they close their eyes because he had "a surprise" for them. While his father, minister Mark Petric, survived the shooting, his mother did not.

Defense lawyers argued video game obsession as a motivating factor behind the killing...that Daniel didn't think the deaths would be real due to his immersion in Halo 3. While the defense was not enough to save the teen from being convicted in January of this year, it did have an effect on the sentence that Petric received this morning.

Instead of the full life sentence prosecutors were aiming for, Daniel Petric was instead sentenced with 23 years to life, with the possibility of parole after 23 years have been served. Lorain County Common Pleas Judge James Burge addressed the video game issue during the sentencing itself, claiming that it was a factor in his final decision.

I suppose the question we have to ask ourselves now is how heavily does the opinion of one common pleas judge weigh on the court system as a whole? We've seen the video game defense fail time and time again in courtrooms across the country, and while it didn't get the defendant off the hook on this occasion, it certainly had some impact. Does this sentence validate the game addiction defense, or is it simply an isolated event?

Update: Clarified sentencing terms.

Teen Who Killed Mother Over Video Game Gets 23 Years to Life [Fox 8 Cleveland]

I’ll give you a hint: it’s not game addiction. It’s media coverage.

That’s not to say that 17-year-olds have been committing matricide since time immemorial. Or that the American Psychiatric Association won’t enter video game addiction into the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders when review time comes up in 2012. Or that it’s somehow normal to log 100 hours of World of Warcraft in a week.

But I submit that just 10 years ago, Petric’s murder trial would not have gotten this kind of attention from the media. We wouldn’t have headlines like “X-Box Slaying” or “Mortal Kombat Murder.” It would just be “Teen Commits Murder Over Toy” with a quote about how he (or she) seemed like such a nice kid.

So why has the press shifted toward highlighting video games in connection with crime or tragedy? And why are they calling compulsive gaming an “addiction” when the American Medical Association and the American Psychiatric Association haven’t named it so (yet)? Is it because the public really thinks that video games are dangerous?

Or maybe the press is looking for easy headlines. For a little experiment, check out how many hits the razor blade story got this morning. Then check out the murder trial’s hits. And lastly, sit back and see how many hits this page gets.

If we pay this much attention to the topic, it’s no wonder that politicians and lawyers are doing it, too. That scares me because too much attention could legitimize something that might not even be real. Think of the Twinkie Defense in Dan White's murder trial – if politicians, psychologists and TV anchors had bought into it, people might well get away with murder if they can cram down a couple of boxes before getting out their gun.

For more reading on the idea of game addiction (you know, with actual science and stuff), check out:
The Daedalus Project
Stanford School of Medicine’s Recent Study
The American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry's Reaction to AMA Recommendations on Video Games

As reported previously, Petric had purchased a copy of Halo 3 following his parents' Mark and Susan had forbid him to do so. After having the game confiscated, Daniel broke into his father's lock box, which held the game and a 9mm handgun, entered the living room of his house, asked his parents to close their eyes, and shot both of them in the head, killing his mother and wounding his father.

Petric's lawyers argued that video game addiction had driven the teen to the crime, but Common Pleas Judge James Burge found otherwise. Petric now faces up a maximum sentence of life in prison without parole.

Once again my condolences go out to the Petric family for this horrible tragedy, though I sincerely hope Daniel doesn't see the outside of a prison for quite a long line.
Teen convicted of killing mother over video game [Associated Press]

In order to support Petric's insanity plea, his lawyers spent Tuesday building up his video game addiction, with his sister testifying that he became addicting following being housebound due to a staph infection following a serious skiing accident. Another character witness, Daniel's 17-year-old friend Jonathan Johnson, explained that Petric was so obsessed with the Halo games that he would spend large amounts of time at Johnson's house playing them. One marathon session took place a week before the shooting, during a time when Petric's father had kicked him out of the house over an argument following the fight.

In effect it was a rather weak defense. Not only did it show no direct correlation between playing the game and shooting his parents, it served to stress the fact that the relationship between Petric and his father had been stressed before the shooting occurred. Furthermore, when Assistant Lorain County Prosecutor Tony Cillo cross-examined Johnson, asking him if he believed Halo 3 was the reason Petric shot his parents, the teen answered, "No."

It was also revealed that Daniel Petric told adolescent forensic psychologist Steven Neuhas during a pre-trial mental health evaluation that he had thought about killing his parents during the weeks leading up to the crime. Between that and his attempt to make the crime scene look like a murder-suicide between his parents, I very much doubt the insanity plea is going to hold any water.

With Daniel having waived the right to a trial by jury, it is now up to County Common Pleas Judge James Burge to render a verdict, which will be announced on January 7th.

Lawyers to make closing remarks in Daniel Petric murder trial [Cleveland.com]
Psychologist: Petric spoke about shooting parents before killing [The Chronicle-Telegram]
image

According to prosectors, Petric, 16 at the time of the shooting, was forbidden to buy Halo 3 by his parents, Mark and Susan Petric. The teen snuck out to purchase the game anyway, and was caught by his parents upon his return. The game was locked up in Mark's lockbox, along with a 9mm handgun.

Mark Petric, a minister at the Life Assembly of God in Wellington, Ohio, testified that soon after on the evening of October 20th, 2007, his son entered the family room with a request.

"Would you guys close your eyes," Daniel Petric asked. "I have a surprise for you."

It was then that Daniel Petric allegedly shot both of his parents in the head, killing his mother instantly. Mark Petric survived due to the timely arrival of his daughter and her husband, who had arrived to watch a Cleveland Indians game.

It's just an amazingly heart-wrenching story, made even more so by the following exchange between father and son related by Mark Petric during testimony:

"Dad, I'm so sorry for what I did to Mom, to you and to the family," Daniel Petric said, according to his father. "I'm so glad you are alive."

"You're my son," Mark Petric responded. "You're my boy."

Lawyers for the accused delivered a brief statement at the opening of the trial, explaining that their client had be under a large amount of stress after being homebound for a year due to a snowboarding accident with nothing to do but watch television and play video games.

I really don't know what to think about this case. The parents were doing what I always suggest parents do, monitoring their son's gameplay and making sure he doesn't play what they don't approve of. Sadly in this case it backfired.

Without knowing more about the family - specifically about Daniel Petric - there's no real way of knowing why this happened. I suspect the boy's lawyers might have a point about being homebound for a year, especially if Daniel was an active teen, as the snowboarding incident seems to suggest.

It's a tragic story that really leaves me with conflicting emotions. On one hand, the fact that a teenager can feel so entitled to something that he'd kill for it worries the hell out of me. At the same time, the fact that the father can forgive him for what he had done is a strong testament to the power of both family and forgiveness. Interpret it how you will.

Daniel Petric killed mother, shot father because they took Halo 3 video game, prosecutors say [Cleveland.com]