• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

James Brady Death ruled a Homicide.

Peter King said:
I totally agree with you. This is lunacy.

Especially because the man who was accused of the shooting was already found not guilty by reason of insanity. He has been prosecuted and found not guilty because he was insane, making this a homicide will not change the lunacy he was suffering from at that time.
Click to expand...

Well the US is nothing if not vengeful these days, perhaps always has been.
 
Peter King said:
I totally agree with you. This is lunacy.

Especially because the man who was accused of the shooting was already found not guilty by reason of insanity. He has been prosecuted and found not guilty because he was insane, making this a homicide will not change the lunacy he was suffering from at that time.
Click to expand...

it's a medical determination, not a criminal justice determination.
 
Sherman123 said:
I think people underestimate how routine this is. It also makes sense. If I shoot you and you later die as a cause of my actions it's homicide. Whether it was 10 hours later or 10 years later.
Click to expand...

yup....

I think folks are confusing a medical finding with a legal finding here...... they aren't the same.
 
Sherman123 said:
Yes. That has always been the case.
Click to expand...

While I agree with the practice, this isn't true. There was a traditionally a year and a day rule in these matters.
 
Sherman123 said:
Yes. That has always been the case.
Click to expand...
If Brady had been hit by a car or contracted cancer and he died from that, his cause of death would not be ruled a homicide.
He died from complications of a thirty three year old gunshot wound . Homicide.
 
Buck Ewer said:
The coroner determined that if Brady had not been shot thirty three years ago he would still be alive.
Brady was 74. had he not been shot he may have lived to be ...who knows 80? 90? possibly 100?.
Click to expand...

However long he lived, he wouldn't have been trapped in a chair and dependent on others for 33 years.
 
TurtleDude said:
I never had any use for Sarah Brady and what she did following her husband's shooting but what happened to James Brady was a real tragedy. its sad the SS guys didn't cut Hinkley in half when he started shooting
Click to expand...
James Brady had brain damage from the gunshot to his head ... but he was far from brain-dead.
His campaign for the passage of the Brady bill was assisted by his wife but it wasn't her idea ... it was his.
Ronald Reagan who was shot and almost killed in the same hail of bullets, voiced his support for the Brady Bill, saying the 1981 assassination attempt might have never happened if the Brady Bill had been law. This reversed his 1975 stance on handgun control.
Like so many human beings, a personal assault and tragedy reversed his views on gun control.
Sarah supported her husbands bill but to imply that she was the only proponent of it is a fallacious construct.
 
Buck Ewer said:
James Brady had brain damage from the gunshot to his head ... but he was far from brain-dead.
His campaign for the passage of the Brady bill was assisted by his wife but it wasn't her idea ... it was his.
Ronald Reagan who was shot and almost killed in the same hail of bullets, voiced his support for the Brady Bill, saying the 1981 assassination attempt might have never happened if the Brady Bill had been law. This reversed his 1975 stance on handgun control.
Like so many human beings, a personal assault and tragedy reversed his views on gun control.
Sarah supported her husbands bill but to imply that she was the only proponent of it is a fallacious construct.
Click to expand...

Oh she pushed him as a symbol for it. but she was the real force behind it.

and the brady bill would have done nothing to stop Hinkley from getting the gun
 
Thrilla said:
it's a medical determination, not a criminal justice determination.
Click to expand...

So being found not guilty by reason of insanity is not a criminal justice determination? I kinda think a judge decided that so why it would not be a criminal justice determination?

Being insane is a medical determination, being found not guilty sounds pretty much like a criminal justice determination.
 
Buck Ewer said:
The coroner found that Brady died from injuries received when Hinckley shot him. He never "healed" correctly.
It took thirty three years for those injuries to finally kill him.
It doesn't matter if it took thirty three minutes or thirty three years for Brady to die from his gunshot wounds ... there is no statute of limitations on murder... ever.
Hinckley just graduated from "attempted assassin" to murderer.
I wonder if Jodie Foster is impressed.
Click to expand...
While murder has no statute of limitation from a legal perspective the injured needs to exipre within 365 days from initial injury in order to be prosecuted.
 
Peter King said:
So being found not guilty by reason of insanity is not a criminal justice determination? I kinda think a judge decided that so why it would not be a criminal justice determination?

Being insane is a medical determination, being found not guilty sounds pretty much like a criminal justice determination.
Click to expand...

the medical examiners determination of "homicide" is a medical determination, not a criminal justice determination.... nothing else has happpened, there are no additional charges, no crimina.l justice machinations.. nothing.

the ME simply ruled on the cause of death , nothing more.
 
Thrilla said:
the medical examiners determination of "homicide" is a medical determination, not a criminal justice determination.... nothing else has happpened, there are no additional charges, no crimina.l justice machinations.. nothing.

the ME simply ruled on the cause of death , nothing more.
Click to expand...

Correct from a legal standpoint while the ME considers this a homicide there is no legal basis to prosecute.
 
Swit said:
While murder has no statute of limitation from a legal perspective the injured needs to exipre within 365 days from initial injury in order to be prosecuted.
Click to expand...

False.
 
TurtleDude said:
Oh she pushed him as a symbol for it. but she was the real force behind it.

and the brady bill would have done nothing to stop Hinkley from getting the gun
Click to expand...
On that point you disagree with Ronald Reagan and millions of Americans who supported the bill for that very reason.
 
Paleocon said:
And from this century:

Year and a day rule - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

Interesting... Thanks for the education. I can point out a bunch of different Illinois cases that were thrown out to the Year and a day rule but from you link it appear that its still open to interpretation in the US... Perhaps to Three years and a day. From you link:

United States

The rule's status in the United States is less clear: many states have abolished it completely, and in 2001 the Supreme Court held that a Tennessee court's retroactive abolition of the rule was constitutional.[2] However, the rule's common law status has been successfully used by defendants to overturn convictions as recently as 2003: the Supreme Court of Wisconsin upheld the year and a day rule in the case before it, but simultaneously abolished the rule for any later cases, noting the modern circumstances of homicide cases, in which there is "the specter of a family's being forced to choose between terminating the use of a life-support system and allowing an accused to escape a murder charge" and the court's finding that it is "unjust to permit an assailant to escape punishment because of a convergence of modern medical advances and an archaic rule from the thirteenth century".[3]

In California, the "year and a day" rule has been changed to a "three years and a day" rule.[4] If a death occurs more than three years and one day after the act alleged to have caused it, there is "a rebuttable presumption that the killing was not criminal", but the prosecution may seek to overcome this presumption.[5]



I am looking into which states comprise many, will get back on that. Appears we actually may be getting wiser in some aspects.

I will contend though... 33 years is no where in the scope of this conversation nor was this man on life support during all that time. But I must admit that Californi'a adoption of 3 years and a day definately refutes the year and a day standard.
 
Buck Ewer said:
On that point you disagree with Ronald Reagan and millions of Americans who supported the bill for that very reason.
Click to expand...

actually most people have no clue about hinkley's situation and they might have been told it would have stopped him but it would not have. He didn't have anything in his record that would have prevented him from buying a handgun from a licensed dealer and of course, only morons believe someone willing to kill the president would have been stopped if a FFL dealer had turned him down

most people who support these stupid laws have very little understanding of the issues.
 
Gun Foes Should Tell The Whole Story - Chicago Tribune

Handgun Control raises millions of dollars through direct-mail solicitations complaining that Hickley bought his handguns without a criminal or mental records check. But the fundraisers don`t mention that Hinckley had no felony record and no public record of mental illness.

and the Brady claim that he was not a resident of texas was also a lie

so the Brady bill would not have stopped John Hinckley from buying a handgun through a licensed dealer

like most gun restrictions-the arguments made in its favor are generally dishonest, lies or don't tell near the whole story
 
Swit said:
Interesting... Thanks for the education. I can point out a bunch of different Illinois cases that were thrown out to the Year and a day rule but from you link it appear that its still open to interpretation in the US... Perhaps to Three years and a day. From you link:

United States

The rule's status in the United States is less clear: many states have abolished it completely, and in 2001 the Supreme Court held that a Tennessee court's retroactive abolition of the rule was constitutional.[2] However, the rule's common law status has been successfully used by defendants to overturn convictions as recently as 2003: the Supreme Court of Wisconsin upheld the year and a day rule in the case before it, but simultaneously abolished the rule for any later cases, noting the modern circumstances of homicide cases, in which there is "the specter of a family's being forced to choose between terminating the use of a life-support system and allowing an accused to escape a murder charge" and the court's finding that it is "unjust to permit an assailant to escape punishment because of a convergence of modern medical advances and an archaic rule from the thirteenth century".[3]

In California, the "year and a day" rule has been changed to a "three years and a day" rule.[4] If a death occurs more than three years and one day after the act alleged to have caused it, there is "a rebuttable presumption that the killing was not criminal", but the prosecution may seek to overcome this presumption.[5]



I am looking into which states comprise many, will get back on that. Appears we actually may be getting wiser in some aspects.

I will contend though... 33 years is no where in the scope of this conversation nor was this man on life support during all that time. But I must admit that Californi'a adoption of 3 years and a day definately refutes the year and a day standard.
Click to expand...

Actually it is no longer in force in most states.

http://leg2.state.va.us/dls/h&sdocs.nsf/fc86c2b17a1cf388852570f9006f1299/8b3110f558f1f8ef85256ebe006269ad/$FILE/RD45.PDF

Pages 11-13
 
Paleocon said:
Actually it is no longer in force in most states.

http://leg2.state.va.us/dls/h&sdocs.nsf/fc86c2b17a1cf388852570f9006f1299/8b3110f558f1f8ef85256ebe006269ad/$FILE/RD45.PDF

Pages 11-13
Click to expand...
Thanks for the link I was looking for it.... you are most definately corerct 31 states have in one form or another abolished the year and a day rule.... lets hope the other 19 get on board.
 
cpgrad08 said:
So if you shoot a person, they survive and die twenty years later it can be called a homicide.

Reagan aide Jim Brady's death ruled homicide
Click to expand...

I have no issue believing that a gunshot wound over 30 years ago could have caused health consequences causing a premature death in Brady.


For example, Christopher Reeves, who broke his neck after being thrown from a horse....died about 10 years after his broken neck. Did he die from a broken neck? No. Would he have repeated pressure ulcers and blood stream infections due to the pressure ulcers without that broken neck? No. So his death was clearly attributable to his injury 10 years prior.

So I can see how a GSW 30 years ago can be the event that eventually lead to his death. Do I think it will or should tried in court - probably not.
 
Swit said:
Thanks for the link I was looking for it.... you are most definately corerct 31 states have in one form or another abolished the year and a day rule.... lets hope the other 19 get on board.
Click to expand...

Agreed.
 
Thrilla said:
nothing wrong with ruling his death a homicide.... if the medical facts determine that he died from consequences of the wound he recieved decades ago.
Click to expand...

Except he was 73 years old.
 
Buck Ewer said:
The coroner determined that if Brady had not been shot thirty three years ago he would still be alive.
Brady was 74. had he not been shot he may have lived to be ...who knows 80? 90? possibly 100?.
Click to expand...

Oh this is hog wash to the nth degree. Brady was 73. Male life span in the US is 77. If Brady was on a ventilator for the last 33 years, absolutely a homicide. But the man lived a normal life for a man in his situation. Government doesn't reclassify combat deaths 30 years down the road for vets who pass due to brain injuries.. why is Brady special?

I bet this all has to do with insurance policies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom