14 DAY TRIAL // We've talked about the teen who tried to use an insanity defense in his murder trial, arguing that Halo 3, his favorite game, drove him to murder. The judge in the case, named James Burge, ruled that this defense strategy was not admissible and that the defendant should be judged as an adult, which could lead to life in prison. At the time, it seemed that the decision of the judge, which basically said that the responsibility lied with the murderer and was not influenced by the videogame, would reflect favorable on the videogame industry.
It seems that things are a bit different as the same judge has just released details related to his ruling. GamePolitics put the whole transcript together. The judge says that “I firmly believe that Daniel Petric had no idea at the time he hatched this plot that if he killed his parents, they would be dead forever,” before adding more things which reflect badly on videogames and on those who play them.
Even if the judge considered Halo 3 an invalid defense for murder, he still believes that the game influenced the murderer heavily, leading to a situation in which he was not aware of what was real and what was not.
The judge said “It's my firm belief that after a while the same physiological responses occur that occur in the ingestion of some drugs. And I believe that an addiction to these games can do the same thing. The dopamine surge, the stimulation of the nucleus accumbens - the same as an addiction. Such that when you stop, your brain won't stand for it.”
So, while he ruled that the teen was not insane, the judge still believes that videogames put him in a state during which he could not tell the difference between killing members of the Covenant and killing his parents. At least, he did not bring this view into the court to base a legal opinion on it.