Posted on 02/20/2016 6:21:39 AM PST by Citizen Zed
Just another Moslem trying to gin up controversy and chaos.
If you are participating in a felony as serious as invading another mans home, the charge is more than appropriate. What is controversial about that... aside from black lives matter dunces?
You can't be serious? A person who, for instance, enters another mans dwelling knows the possible outcomes unless they are SEVERELY mentally incompetent. Everyone knows it's a dangerous game to break into a home, and I mean everyone. If you set that crime in motion, you are absolutely responsible for any potential outcomes. Participation in such acts is outright and blatant top-tier disregard for the life and safety of every single person involved. The charges are more than appropriate.
Nowadays there are 14 year olds who stand six feet & weigh 200 pounds. Inside your home illegally, that’s a threat.
There was a nearly identical case in Indiana recently.
After several years, the court overturned their convictions. They still had to do time for the burgulary, so the higher court apparently had no procedural problem with the trial...rather it just decided to invalidate the felony murder law?
200 lbs, 120 lbs, I dont care, I will take out either. A 120 pounder with a blunt object, knife or gun can kill you dead.
If an accomplice entices a child or a mentally incompetent person to accompany him, with the intention of using the homeowner of police to kill him there might be grounds for charging the accomplice with murder, but such circumstances can never be proved in practice. In that particular circumstance, a charge of manslaughter could be justified.
I agree with Lonesome. I thought these laws were intended to be able to charge all of the perps with the most serious crime committed. In the example cited there was no murder, so how can anyone be charged with murder?
Different example. Two perps break into a house. Cops arrive and arrest both. While restrained cop kills one perp (unjustified). Do you charge the other with murder? He set the events in motion.
I’ve heard of cases where an arsonist is charged with murder because the fire truck has an accident and kills somebody. The people driving the fire truck were not committing a crime either, but felony murder applied.
Thus proving that you're in the right state.
Not controversial at all. There are a lot of guys doing life sentences for acts of their accomplices. The only thing that’s hard to do is get the death penalty for someone who doesn’t do the actual killing. Unless it’s a murder for hire, it’s damn near impossible.
This is a girbilist writing.
Consequences for actions is a controversial topic.
Interesting, how the Trib chose white subhumans for this story. If one reads deeply into the story, it turns out the felony murder rule is usually used to extract plea bargains, as it was here from the little creep. Read farther, and it also comes out that the gang was planning to steal the victim’s gun collection, which, IMHO, would have been sold to Chicago bangers and other wonderful youts who’d have probably used those guns to murder other people. Thus, all in all, an excellent outcome where justice was done.
Bad example. If the fire truck had killed the arsonist’s accomplice it might pertain, but my thought in that case would be along that line that Karma is a mother[lover].
In the case you cite, I might opt for manslaughter. Murder implies intent and reasonably foreseeable consequences.
Please rethink your statements and how you arrived at your position. You are better than that.
The writer has brought dishonor to her family.
Murder doesn’t always imply intent. In most states, one way to charge for 2nd degree murder is gross negligence...ie a reasonable person could foresee that somebody could get killed.
You seem to be narrowing this to only premeditated murder...but theaw doesnt at all.
Felony murder rule - If someone is committing a felony, and a death ensues, it is by definition a murder. The person committing the felony is the one guilty of that murder. And anyone participating in the planning or execution of the crime is guilty of the felony - they don’t have to be present to win this prize. (Accessory before the fact or parties to a crime - the name varies by state).
The corollary to the felony murder rule is the misdemeanor manslaughter rule. It isn’t nearly as commonly applied, but in the absence of a vehicular homicide law, you might see it in some fatal car wrecks. It might also appear in some minor theft cases where one of the criminals makes a fatally stupid mistake.
I do understand why someone from liberal Massachusetts or California might not understand simple, long standing, rules of criminal justice.
Your ignorance of even liberal Masshole law is fairly complete.
Title 1, Chapter 265, Section 1:
Section 1. Murder committed with deliberately premeditated malice aforethought, or with extreme atrocity or cruelty, or in the commission or attempted commission of a crime punishable with death or imprisonment for life, is murder in the first degree. Murder which does not appear to be in the first degree is murder in the second degree. Petit treason shall be prosecuted and punished as murder. The degree of murder shall be found by the jury.
There is that word again: Teens
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.