Posted on 06/27/2018 4:22:23 AM PDT by reaganaut1
SACRAMENTO — Late in the evening on Jan. 27, 2004, four teenagers broke into an elderly neighbor’s house in the Southern California town of Perris, looking for cash.
One of them, Shawn Khalifa, guarded the back door. Shawn, who had just turned 15, slipped into the kitchen and stole some chocolate candies. He briefly saw that the homeowner was seriously hurt, and he ran back outside.
No one accused Shawn of laying a hand on the victim, Hubert Love, 77, but a jury convicted the teenager of first-degree murder.
Mr. Khalifa, now 29 and serving a sentence of 25 years to life, is one of hundreds of people convicted in California under a legal doctrine known as the felony murder rule, which holds that anyone involved in certain kinds of serious felonies that result in death is as liable as the actual killer.
“I knew I didn’t kill anyone,” Mr. Khalifa said. “I felt and kind of knew that I was going to spend the rest of my life in prison. It didn’t seem like there was any room to be a human being again. My life was over.”
But the hard doctrine that sent Mr. Khalifa to prison may be softening. A bill moving through the California Legislature would change state law so that only someone who actually killed, intended to kill or acted as a major player with “reckless indifference to human life” could face murder charges.
...
“Many times in California, if you didn’t commit the murder, didn’t know the murder occurred, you could be charged and have the same sentence as the actual murderer,” said State Senator Nancy Skinner, who introduced the legislation in part because, she said, felony murder cases disproportionately affect women and young black and Latino men.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
I recall that the felony murder rule gets invoked if you get involved in a felony where a resulting death is easily anticipated. Breaking and entering an occupied home falls squarely under that, as does armed robbery, even with an unloaded gun. Embezzlement would not.
They most assuredly took part in the plotting and planning. Ergo, even if the accomplice did not actually shoot or stab someone, he/she played a major part in the outcome.
Kalifornia should release EVERY violent felon immediately and give them quarters in West LA, SF, Silicon Valley, and Marin.
Put your money where your mouth is, Libs.
Because they support abortion Demonicrats need to be charged in Nuremberg-style trials with infant genocide, crimes aagainst humanity, and treason.
Keep in mind that this is the same state that decriminalized the theft of poor peoples' cars. Once again, the people being preyed upon by perps involved in violent crimes are not likely to be affluent, live in gated communities with armed security.
Under this stupid law, the driver of the getaway car in an armed robbery probably wouldn’t face anything more serious than a speeding ticket.
He aided and abetted tne murderers thus participating in the murder.
At 15 he is a life time criminal and unredeemable. It is in fact a racial thing. Young men of his black race rob and murder, preying on old people.
The racist politico is an enemy of Americans
Where the NY Times writes “was seriously hurt” you should read “was beaten to death by his accomplices”.
If four thugs break into a house, and three of them may someone to death whim the fourth watches the door, they are all accomplices to murder.
There may well be cases where this doctrine has been misapplied.
This isn’t one of them.
From the San Diego Union in 2007:
“Khalifa was with 19-year-old Fernando Rivera when Rivera killed Love and later, while in Love’s stolen car, shot to death alleged accomplice Juan Pena and dumped his body.”
TOTAL ACCOMPLICE. BYE!!
In 1985 our city had a guy get life in prison for the deaths of two cops.
He and his brother were “bad” guys. When they were stopped for a routine traffic ticket, the first brother went crazy and shot both cops.
The second brother got two life sentences with no parole.
The second brother did not act against the police and he, by all accounts, remained in the car until his bother fired the shots.
The first brother killed himself as the police closed in on him the next day.
Was this proper? They were not committing a felony at the time.
That is where I learned about Felony Murder. I am not suggesting anyone get out of jail for being part of the crime. I am merely suggesting that every case is different and it makes sense to leave that up to a jury or judge during sentencing.
And dog laws are predujicial against Pit Bulls as they are responsible for 70% of the dog bite deaths in the USA.
“Many times in California, if you didn’t commit the murder, didn’t know the murder occurred, you could be charged and have the same sentence as the actual murderer,” said State Senator Nancy Skinner, who introduced the legislation in part because, she said, felony murder cases disproportionately affect women and young black and Latino men.
Oh boo hoo!
If you don’t want to be charged with crimes stop being part of violent criminals little crews when they go out hurting people!
And of course Ms Skinner plays the race card.
Well, guess what? Those folks are involved in a disproportionate percentage of crimes.
Why are you so harsh on this fine young man?
All he wanted was some candies, and who doesn’t like candy?
Really, this could have been any one of us here on FR.
/s
That is why it's murder.
One suspects that the new york rag is rooting for Shawn Khalifa because his name is Shawn Khalifa.
The law is good as it stands. You assist someone in committing a crime, and an innocent person is killed in the commission of the crime, you have given your support to the murder.
You hold up a bank together with another criminal. The bank president is murdered. You are both guilty. It’s incidental to the outcome who actually pulled the trigger.
In this case both deserve death, but will get 15 years, and be out in 10. Think CA or the NYT is going to condemn someone named Shawn Khalifa?
In the particular case that *you* describe I might not have voted "guilty" on a murder charge against the brother.But in the case described in this piece I absolutely *would* vote "guilty".
I was doing a job in a prison. I had lunch with the guard that was assigned to me and we started talking. He said that is son was in a different prison.
The son had two strikes against him, and was getting his life straightened out. But his dad kept warning him to not hang out with his old crowd.
Well, he was at one of these friend’s house and they ran out of beer, and money. The friend said “Hey - Joe downtown owes me $20. Drive me down there and I’ll get it and then we can buy some beer.”
The son drove him down, waited outside in the car. His friend came back with the cash. Soon they were pulled over by the cops. The friend had robbed Joe and beaten him up. The son was driving the “get-away-car”.
Thee strikes and you’re out.
I reacted to the dad that it seemed pretty harsh.
“Maybe - but that’s the law. I warned him not to hang out with those guys.”
If you're not ready to kill someone over a few pieces of candy, then maybe you shouldn't associate with, aide, and abet those who are. Decisions, especially poor ones, have consequences.
THAT would be a charge worth pursuing.
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.