Tried as an adult

This is a horrible story. Simply horrible.

These boys need to pay for their crime, to be sure, but I am confused as to why the 14-year-old boy is being tried as an adult, while the 9, 10, and 13-year-old boys are being tried as juveniles. I understand in some cases, if the crime or the maturity of the youth justifies it, a minor can be tried as an adult. But 14 years old? When I was 14, I could not drive. I could not buy a pack of cigarettes or a lottery ticket. I had not yet had my first kiss. Granted, I was naive and sheltered compared to many youths in the country at my age at that time, but nevertheless I was in no way an adult, physically or emotionally.
Nor, I believe, can anyone be.
But that really doesn't justify my opinion that the eldest boy shouldn't be tried as an adult like the others. What I really don't get is what they think the difference is between a 14-year-old and his 13-year-old cohort that justifies the difference in legality?

I'm no lawyer, but it seems to me that 13 and 14 are pretty similar, and neither of them very mature.

I do not condone the actions of these boys. I am just saying that I don't understand why the 14-year-old should do 10 years in prison, while the 13-year-old (who technically could be a single day younger) should do probation at a juvenile facility, and have this dropped off his record when he turns 18?


_