Death Penalty? Seriously?

[Lursa]

Irrelevant. Literally. :shrug:

Since it is about intent to cause injury.

Sorry.

Nope, wrong and it's pretty clear in the law (see post 13 AGAIN for all of it)

A death caused by a reckless disregard for human life.

"A non-premeditated killing, resulting from an assault or act intending in which death of the victim was a distinct possibility."

It's speaking to the act being intentional, not death.

15-17 yr olds knew it was a distinct possibility, so a jury of adults certainly will as well.

OTOH, a few on the jury may be stupidly sympathetic to these deadly delinquents and let them off anyway.

 

[Lursa]

Already addressed. I never have been in court in Mich. but I self represented twice and won against lawyers... once in Ca and once in NZ. I'll stick with my knowledge and experience.

Yeah, no. Not remotely a cred regarding homicides.....unless you were representing yourself on homicide charges?

 

[Thumper39]

I am all for law and order but the Death Penalty?

Yes, they were reckless and dangerous and a man died and they must be held accountable. But Manslaughter. 5-10 in prison maybe for the actual thrower but a couple of them didn't do much. This seems like total overkill (pun intended).

Thoughts?

EDIT:

I think I got the DP part wrong. Apologies... murder. Charged with Murder. That is still overkill.

I almost wonder if they aren't charging them with such a stiff crime cause they're looking to loose. You see it happen sometimes. To appease the public they charge them with a more serious crime than than they actually committed. Jury fails to convict cause what they did didn't meet the letter of the law requirement.

 

[calamity]

Both are cases of projectiles known to be capable of doing serious damage to humans expended with little concern for the people on the receiving end.....

The correct analogy would be shooting at the tires of moving cars. Shooting at people in a moving crowd would not fit.

But, of course, it requires intelligence to make correct analogies.

 

[Fledermaus]

The correct analogy would be shooting at the tires of moving cars. Shooting at people in a moving crowd would not fit.

But, of course, it requires intelligence to make correct analogies.

You ought not be tossing insults around.

I'll match sheepskins and testing scores with you any day.

Your analogy has the shooter targeting a portion of the vehicle that would not directly endanger the occupants. Are you seriously suggesting the idiots on the bridge targeted areas that would not cause injury.....?

 

[calamity]

You ought not be tossing insults around.

I'll match sheepskins and testing scores with you any day.

I'll take that seriously once you begin making proper analogies.

 

[Fledermaus]

I'll take that seriously once you begin making proper analogies.

It was proper.

Your inability to accept that is driven by your stance on firearms.

 

[Dragonfly]

Charging them with murder allows them to plea bargain down to manslaughter.

Either way I won't lose any sleep over the charges. They killed a guy.
I won't ever believe they didn't know that killing somebody was a probable outcome of what they were doing.

 

[holbritter]

I almost wonder if they aren't charging them with such a stiff crime cause they're looking to loose. You see it happen sometimes. To appease the public they charge them with a more serious crime than than they actually committed. Jury fails to convict cause what they did didn't meet the letter of the law requirement.

I think they do it that way for just that possibility. I've heard of cases charged heavily but the conviction is on a lessor charge. If they start low, they have no other options.

 

[Lovebug]

Is it really a prank? At that age, they should be well aware of the consequences of their actions, no? What did they think would happen? What is the difference between shooting into a car and dropping a rock? I don't know, I just wait until the verdict is in.

 

[calamity]

It was proper.

Your inability to accept that is driven by your stance on firearms.

No. My reason for calling your analogy incorrect is that pointing guns at actual people is not the same as chucking rocks at cars. Duh.

 

[Thumper39]

I think they do it that way for just that possibility. I've heard of cases charged heavily but the conviction is on a lessor charge. If they start low, they have no other options.

That's true. But sometimes it seems a little too convienent. I haven't read up too much on this story. But there have been many others that they charged heavily when the crime did not meet the requirements of the charge and then would not let the jury convict of a lesser charge. You see this a lot in cases involving cops and other public servants.

 

[Fledermaus]

No. My reason for calling your analogy incorrect is that pointing guns at actual people is not the same as chucking rocks at cars. Duh.

Reckless disregard is reckless disregard....

Duh

Perhaps the shooter didn't target anyone.

Duh

Did I say he targeted anyone? No.

Duh

 

[Thoreau72]

Charging them with murder allows them to plea bargain down to manslaughter.

Either way I won't lose any sleep over the charges. They killed a guy.
I won't ever believe they didn't know that killing somebody was a probable outcome of what they were doing.

That's pretty much where I'm at. They know the male brain is very slow to develop. They did kill somebody. Hopefully the judge will impose a just sentence.

 

[ttwtt78640]

No. My reason for calling your analogy incorrect is that pointing guns at actual people is not the same as chucking rocks at cars. Duh.

Those cars were known to contain actual people.

 

[ttwtt78640]

I think they do it that way for just that possibility. I've heard of cases charged heavily but the conviction is on a lessor charge. If they start low, they have no other options.

That works both ways. I was charged with reckless driving (alleged 69 mph in a 30 mph zone) which is a "must appear" offense so I went to court and proved that the vehicle that I was driving was totally incapable of attaining that speed within the (approx 1/8 mile) distance claimed. The judge then "amended" the charge to 45 mph in a 30 mph zone (which was theoretically possible yet not what the state had alleged was the "radar confirmed" evidence), found me guilty "as charged" and levied a simple speeding fine but with added "court costs". That was total BS because it cost me a day off work plus court costs. If I was initially charged with speeding then I would have just paid the ticket saving a day's pay and the added "court costs". Essentially, I was punished more harshly simply for daring to successfully challenge the state's initial total BS charge.

 

[bubbabgone]

I am all for law and order but the Death Penalty?

Yes, they were reckless and dangerous and a man died and they must be held accountable. But Manslaughter. 5-10 in prison maybe for the actual thrower but a couple of them didn't do much. This seems like total overkill (pun intended).

Thoughts?

EDIT:

I think I got the DP part wrong. Apologies... murder. Charged with Murder. That is still overkill.

If murder was the only charge, maybe it was a way to assure a not guilty verdict.
Unless there's more to this than being careless asshole punks.

 

[Mr Person]

Why would intentional acts that resulted in homicide not be murder?

It depends on the nature of the intent.

 

[Mr Person]

My oldest son was driving from the Olympic Peninsula to Tacoma when he went under an overpass and a rock came through the windshield of his car. He wasn't hurt (thank God!) and the kids who did it were caught, but even bearing that my son was that close to being killed, I strongly disagree that those boys should be charged with murder. Manslaughter, yes, but not murder.

I'd be more keen on letting a jury decide between 2nd degree murder and involuntary manslaughter for the one who through the fatal rock. It was several pounds. The cars were going at least 70mph on that highway.



I'm not typing out the full model superior court instruction, but if that state's law is like MA, 2nd degree murder intent:

A. Intended to kill the victim; or

B. Intended to cause grievous bodily harm; or

C. Intended to do an act which, in the circumstances known to the defendant, a reasonable person would have known created a plain and strong likelihood that death would result.

There's also potential reduction to voluntary manslaughter in murder 2 cases where there are mitigating circumstances, but the ones they have in mind don't seem to be present here (Def. acted in heat of passion).


The prosecutor could choose to charge voluntary manslaughter and ignore murder, in which case the intent is "The defendant intentionally inflicted an injury or injuries on the victim likely to cause death", plus death, plus no proper self-defense or third-party self defense.


There's also involuntary manslaughter

- unlawful killing unintentionally caused by wanton and reckless conduct

- caused by a battery that the defendant knew or should have known created a high degree of likelihood that substantial harm will result to another.

There's more variations but you get the point. Here, if a "reasonable view" of the evidence permits a finding of involuntary manslaughter rather than murder, the defendant is entitled to an instruction on involuntary manslaughter even if the government only alleged murder. But there are exceptions. yadda yadda.



If I were the prosecutor I'd be inclined to simply charge murder 2nd. Sounds like they'd likely get an involuntary manslaughter instruction. But I dunno. Seems there's a plain and strong likelihood of death if you throw a several-pound rock at a car on a highway. The only random factor is whether you hit. Enough for reckless & wanton manslaughter instead? I'd let a jury decide that.

 

[Goshin]

Re: The perps are accused of murder. But they're not up for the dealth penalty, TMK

Yah, they're charged with Murder, apparently. A man died, & it wasn't a one-off kind of deal. The footage shows a lot of rocks & debris @ the scene of the alleged murder - apparently other assaults by the same crew, & the clip talks about the same perps doing the same with car parts & rocks & similar @ another overpass. @ 32 ft./sec./sec., anything heavy dropped from an overpass is potentially deadly.

We can't have that, there are overpasses everywhere around cities & freeways, even out in the boonies. I don't know how much flexibility on charging there is in Michigan - if the DA decided the perps need to be made an example of (or there's an election coming up), he or she may have decided to go maximum John Law on them. If the charge is fairly automatic, then it isn't so much in the DA's hands, as in the Legislature's hands - the Leges across the country in the last 15 or 20 years like to restrict the judge's options on punishment, & sometimes they go so far as to specify how much leeway the DAs have as well, in charging the accused.

We'll just have to see. If it's any comfort, forensics can probably pin down who threw/dropped the heavier items, if the perps didn't wear gloves. Failing that, of course, the DA can charge them all. & I assume they're all charged the same, on analogy with the driver of a getaway car @ a bank robbery - if anyone is hurt or killed during the crime, they all get charged the same as if they pulled the trigger.

The maximum penalty the perps face is life in prison, according to the clip @ the URL - apparently the charges don't reach the gravity of the death penalty - or maybe MI doesn't have the death penalty. It's any ugly case, no matter how the actual trial(s) turn out.

God rest the soul of the deceased, & comfort his survivors & family & friends. The perps will have lots of time to ponder their choices of recreational activities. & they were apprehended @ a McDonald's? Really?

:yt:


What he said.

 

[Mr Person]

Charging them with murder allows them to plea bargain down to manslaughter.

Either way I won't lose any sleep over the charges. They killed a guy.
I won't ever believe they didn't know that killing somebody was a probable outcome of what they were doing.

And, if my memory serves, they went and ate McDonald's or somesuch after killing the guy.

 

[Mr Person]

Re: The perps are accused of murder. But they're not up for the dealth penalty, TMK

Yah, they're charged with Murder, apparently. A man died, & it wasn't a one-off kind of deal. The footage shows a lot of rocks & debris @ the scene of the alleged murder - apparently other assaults by the same crew, & the clip talks about the same perps doing the same with car parts & rocks & similar @ another overpass. @ 32 ft./sec./sec., anything heavy dropped from an overpass is potentially deadly.

We can't have that, there are overpasses everywhere around cities & freeways, even out in the boonies. I don't know how much flexibility on charging there is in Michigan - if the DA decided the perps need to be made an example of (or there's an election coming up), he or she may have decided to go maximum John Law on them. If the charge is fairly automatic, then it isn't so much in the DA's hands, as in the Legislature's hands - the Leges across the country in the last 15 or 20 years like to restrict the judge's options on punishment, & sometimes they go so far as to specify how much leeway the DAs have as well, in charging the accused.

We'll just have to see. If it's any comfort, forensics can probably pin down who threw/dropped the heavier items, if the perps didn't wear gloves. Failing that, of course, the DA can charge them all. & I assume they're all charged the same, on analogy with the driver of a getaway car @ a bank robbery - if anyone is hurt or killed during the crime, they all get charged the same as if they pulled the trigger.

The maximum penalty the perps face is life in prison, according to the clip @ the URL - apparently the charges don't reach the gravity of the death penalty - or maybe MI doesn't have the death penalty. It's any ugly case, no matter how the actual trial(s) turn out.

God rest the soul of the deceased, & comfort his survivors & family & friends. The perps will have lots of time to ponder their choices of recreational activities. & they were apprehended @ a McDonald's? Really?

How? They're not going to get fingerprints of rocks that were thrown at speeding cars. Virtually impossible.

(And, I might as well mention, forensics is nothing like Law & Order. In fact, as even the NAS has repeatedly found, just about every branch of "forensic science" does not have any proven scientific foundation. It was just passed off as "science" by "experts" in courts 100ish years ago, and everyone just sort of accepted it. Fingerprint analysis, toolmark identification, ballistics, blood spatter analysis, etc., quite a lot of these fields ever had their basic assumptions tested and proven).



The most likely way they find out will be when someone crumbles in exchange for a nice plea deal. After all. They each know who through the fatal rock. And what's Omerta to teenagers facing life in prison?

 

[calamity]

Charging them with murder allows them to plea bargain down to manslaughter.

Either way I won't lose any sleep over the charges. They killed a guy.
I won't ever believe they didn't know that killing somebody was a probable outcome of what they were doing.

Probable, perhaps even likely, outcome is still not murder with intent. See the difference?

 

[TheGoverness]

I am all for law and order but the Death Penalty?

Yes, they were reckless and dangerous and a man died and they must be held accountable. But Manslaughter. 5-10 in prison maybe for the actual thrower but a couple of them didn't do much. This seems like total overkill (pun intended).

Thoughts?

EDIT:

I think I got the DP part wrong. Apologies... murder. Charged with Murder. That is still overkill.

Yeah, I think manslaughter would make more sense here.

 

[Bodi]

Yeah, no. Not remotely a cred regarding homicides.....unless you were representing yourself on homicide charges?

Regarding judges, proof, evidence, procedures... etc.