96 year old confesses to killing his brother when he was 16yrs old?

Technically, you would need to look up the law as it existed in 1928, which would have been the year he supposedly committed the crime.

The real problem is going to be lack of evidence. Just because he *says* that he killed his brother doesn't necessarily *prove* that he did. His brother's corpse, if it can be found and exhumed, is almost beyond forensic science--no tissue remains, so only skeletal examination could be performed. Some hair and/or fingernails *might* still remain, but I doubt it.

If a grand jury decides to file charges and a district attorney goes ahead with prosecution, they are going to have a really flimsy case, at best. Honestly, I suspect that they will prosecute--no statute of limitations on murder--but lack of evidence will result in "not guilty".

Is the 96 y/o found to be of Sound Mind, first thing that needs established. 80 years ago they didn't try 16 y/o as adults in Texas did they? If not they can't charge him as an adult under what is commonly called the "grandfather clause". However since he is already 96 the law wouldn't likely do much about him short of convicted him, although since he would be tried as a juvenile there isn't much more they could do. Then you'd have to factor in that after 80 years it would be very difficult to gather evidence and show the person committed the crime. A simple confession alone isn't likely to get him prosecuted. He'd need details to prove it was him for starters.

Law may be open as to the fact that the state could charge this man with some form of crime for the death of his brother.

Now, if the state kept no evidence, or if it has no record of the crime even being a crime ( was it called murder upon the brothers death?).

The end result is that the state would most likely decline to press charges against the brother at this point without having witnessess and evidence from the original crime site and date.

Simply confessing to something does NOT make one guilty, no more than professing innocense means that you are.

He can still be tried, there is no statute of limitations on murder, but he would be sentenced under the laws that were in effect at the time of the murder. I dont think they charged juveniles as adults back in the early 1900's.

80 years have passed. I doubt any detective could prove the case without a shadow of doubt.

The records of the murder victim have most likely been long thrown away. Usually a police station or town hall or court house only keep records for up to 30 years then dispose of them.

They would probably place him under house arrest since he is not a risk to the public any more and he was a juvenile at the time of the murder.

He will be tried as a juvenile... and he cannot be executed. The supreme court outlawed juvenile executions in 2005.

To the best of my knowledge, in all 50 states (57 if you are an Obama supporter) there is NO statute of limitations on Murder.

This man is likely going to be charged with murder..... though after 80 years, may die before his trial even makes it to court.

Dying...... it drives people to clearing their conscious and making peace with their God.