• 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!

Death Penalty? Seriously?

The intent could have been to kill but it just as easily could have been to damage cars, cause an accident, scare drivers or to shut down the highway... that is a reasonable doubt.
...which any reasonably intelligent person would know also could lead to serious injury or death.

In this post you only argued against intent. You did not argue against consequences of willful actions.

2nd degree.
 
A problem of long standing

The intent could have been to kill but it just as easily could have been to damage cars, cause an accident, scare drivers or to shut down the highway... that is a reasonable doubt.

Yah. This has been an ongoing problem in the Flint area for some time. See https://www.usnews.com/news/best-st...nt-overpass-rock-throwing-long-been-a-problem

"Police: Flint Overpass Rock-Throwing Long Been a Problem

"Police say the recent death of a vehicle passenger after teenagers allegedly threw rocks from a Flint area overpass is just one of many cases in past decades where people hurl debris from area bridges.

Oct. 26, 2017, at 1:02 p.m.

...

"The events date back about four decades ago to when Delores Hunt had to swerve to avoid a concrete block heaved over a bridge.

"If I hadn't swerved at the right moment, that block could have came through my windshield and I might not be here today," she told the newspaper in 1990. "It scared me."

"In October 1990, Tracey Pearson was driving to work in Davison Township when she swerved to avoid what was eventually discovered to be a scarecrow dangling from an overpass. Police said her car flipped and ejected her, resulting in her death. The people involved in dangling the scarecrow were sentenced to three years in prison for involuntary manslaughter."

(My emphasis - more @ the URL)

Presumably the murder charges in the current case are because the accused perps actively dropped/threw rocks, concrete, etc. @ cars driving 70-75mph on the freeway below. I'm certain the police & EMTs are sick of dealing with these incidents, & the slightest inattention (like in the Oct. 1990 incident with Ms. Pearson above) can be fatal. I doubt that the criminal justice system nor the jury will be in the least sympathetic to the accused.

& the Sharon Budd case (another rock-throwing - July 2014), although she survived with severe injuries:

"Rock as deadly weapon[edit]

"Defense attorneys have challenged the prosecution's claim that the rock was a "deadly weapon", claiming that it was merely a "delinquent act" unless the prosecution could demonstrate intent to produce death or serious bodily injury.[3][14][20][21]

"Sentencing[edit]

"Brett Lahr (19) was sentenced to prison for 18 months to 20 years.[22] Tyler Porter, Dylan Lahr and Keefer McGee were sentenced to serve 22 months to 10 years, 54 months to 24 years and  11 1⁄2 months to 23 months, respectively.[23][11] Brett Lahr was sentenced to an additional year in prison for violating his parole.[11]"

"Randy Budd[edit]

"On August 7, 2016, Randy Budd died from a self-inflicted gunshot wound.[24] After the Interstate 80 rock throwing incident severely injured Sharon Budd, Randy advocated for the Ohio Department of Transportation to install protective fencing on bridge overpasses.[25]" (Randy was Sharon's husband, & was in the car @ the time of the assault.)

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_80_rock_throwing

(My emphasis)

This case was in Pennsylvania, I believe. The prosecution there wasn't impressed by the defense, nor was the judge nor jury.
 
Last edited:
If you drop a penny from the top of the Empire State Building, you know it could split open someone's head. I think these kids knew dropping boulders on cars could kill. Will they do it again? Why not?

Sent from my Z833 using Tapatalk
 
...which any reasonably intelligent person would know also could lead to serious injury or death.

In this post you only argued against intent. You did not argue against consequences of willful actions.

2nd degree.

That is up for the jury to decide... you present your case I present mine...
 
That's it? That's your defense of your non-point? Guns and rocks are different? Well, hell, I guess murder by stabbing is just "creative whittling". Hey, it's just as sound as your so-called point.

No. Cars and people are different. Duh.
 
The OP... oh, wait, that was you... argued regarding the charges, not jury deliberations.

Yeah... we argued the charges. We disagree. I do not see murder based off of what I have read. You do. We are done arguing charges. Right?
 
No. Cars and people are different. Duh.

The analogy fails on such a basic level it is amazing he is arguing that it is valid...
 
That's not a catch-all "get out of jail free card" excuse.

I did not mean to imply that it was. I like to look at the proverbial 'big picture' when seeking justice. They should be punished appropriately.
 
I did not mean to imply that it was. I like to look at the proverbial 'big picture' when seeking justice. They should be punished appropriately.

They should. But are they?
 
And what if they merely fired an AK style weapon in the general direction of a crown and hit and killed someone?

In many states, if not all, there is a distinction between a "deadly weapon" such as an AK47, and a "dangerous instrument" such as a big rock or baseball bat. The wording in the statutes may prescribe that different elements exist in order to meet the threshold of a specific crime category.

These teens will not face the death penalty. Unplanned, intentional murder? Hard to prove that due to the "intentional" requirement. I'm sure the intended to damage the cars and scare the people.

They should be locked up the maximum sentence available if this is just one incident in a pattern of behavior. My guess is, if they hadn't been caught, they would do it again, regardless of whether or not they killed someone.
 
In many states, if not all, there is a distinction between a "deadly weapon" such as an AK47, and a "dangerous instrument" such as a big rock or baseball bat. The wording in the statutes may prescribe that different elements exist in order to meet the threshold of a specific crime category.

These teens will not face the death penalty. Unplanned, intentional murder? Hard to prove that due to the "intentional" requirement. I'm sure the intended to damage the cars and scare the people.

They should be locked up the maximum sentence available if this is just one incident in a pattern of behavior. My guess is, if they hadn't been caught, they would do it again, regardless of whether or not they killed someone.

I have repeatedly stated they do not merit the 1st degree charges but that 2nd degree fits.

Post 13 contains the law pertaining to 2nd degree murder.

I don't think they intended to kill. I do think they should have figured out their actions could lead to death.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom