Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

A man is charged with murder for the killing done by a cop.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Leonhard View Post
    Sounds like nonsense to me. He didn't kill anyone, so charging him with "murder" is ridiculous.
    It is not unusual, we have the same law in my very liberal state...
    Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
      The bank robbery example was meant for illustrative purposes only but more to the matter at hand; I believe that you left out some pertinent details in order to bolster your argument
      He did not point the gun at his friend or killed him. It is entirely fair game that the police shot one of them in the shoot out. The punishment of murder just doesn't make any sense. This isn't murder. If there's an extra crime for the death I have no word for what it would be. This is a death, during a felony basically. Which carries a murder penalty? Would he also have gotten a murder sentence if his friend had had a heart attack or a stroke?

      It frankly just doesn't make sense. It might be the name of it.

      If he had killed a resident he would be guilty of murder, if he had killed a police officer he would have been guilty of murder. If a stray bullet had hit a bystander there's manslaughter of some reckless sort. But his friend dying seems to be an entirely accidental byproduct of what they did, brought on by their own actions.

      I don't see that as murder.
      Last edited by Leonhard; 06-24-2020, 06:31 PM.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Leonhard View Post
        He did not point the gun at his friend or killed him. It is entirely fair game that the police shot one of them in the shoot out. The punishment of murder just doesn't make any sense. This isn't murder. If there's an extra crime for the death I have no word for what it would be. This is a death, during a felony basically. Which carries a murder penalty? Would he also have gotten a murder sentence if his friend had had a heart attack or a stroke?

        It frankly just doesn't make sense. It might be the name of it.

        If he had killed a resident he would be guilty of murder, if he had killed a police officer he would have been guilty of murder. If a stray bullet had hit a bystander there's manslaughter of some reckless sort. But his friend dying seems to be an entirely accidental byproduct of what they did, brought on by their own actions.

        I don't see that as murder.
        Your issue with this seems similar to my issue with classifying George Floyd's death as murder (I think it is at most manslaughter. But in Minnesota the thing they call 3rd degree murder is what my state calls manslaughter, or so I gather). Does it help if we call it "Someone died because you committed a crime, so you get extra punishment" or "death by crime" or "technical involuntary manslaughter"?
        "If you believe, take the first step, it leads to Jesus Christ. If you don't believe, take the first step all the same, for you are bidden to take it. No one wants to know about your faith or unbelief, your orders are to perform the act of obedience on the spot. Then you will find yourself in the situation where faith becomes possible and where faith exists in the true sense of the word." - Dietrich Bonhoeffer, The Cost of Discipleship

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by myth View Post
          Your issue with this seems similar to my issue with classifying George Floyd's death as murder (I think it is at most manslaughter. But in Minnesota the thing they call 3rd degree murder is what my state calls manslaughter, or so I gather). Does it help if we call it "Someone died because you committed a crime, so you get extra punishment" or "death by crime" or "technical involuntary manslaughter"?
          Yeah I think murder should be reserved for a person having an intent to kill either in the moment, or with forethought. To call anything else murder just waters down the term.

          He already got charged for armed robbery, and for exchanging fire with the police. That one of them died seems to be a not unexpected accident. It is not the fault of the police, but I don't see any reason to punish one of the survivors for it. I'm not sure what this accomplishes as punishment over and above the punishment for armed robbery.

          As I said if his friend had a heart attack would that have been murder?

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Leonhard View Post
            Yeah I think murder should be reserved for a person having an intent to kill either in the moment, or with forethought. To call anything else murder just waters down the term.

            He already got charged for armed robbery, and for exchanging fire with the police. That one of them died seems to be a not unexpected accident. It is not the fault of the police, but I don't see any reason to punish one of the survivors for it. I'm not sure what this accomplishes as punishment over and above the punishment for armed robbery.

            As I said if his friend had a heart attack would that have been murder?
            Potentially, but it seems it would be hard to argue that the crime was the proximate cause of death.

            As to what it accomplishes, well....let's see if I remember this right from when I was getting my degree in criminal justice.

            It's a big-picture question regarding the deterrent effect of incarceration.I believe the term is rational choice theory. I suppose the basic idea is that if there's a threat of more punishment for the crime, it would cause some people to think twice about committing the crime in the first place. The greater the punishment, the higher the deterrent effect. So for the individual defendant in this case, it doesn't really accomplish anything. But for all the would-be criminals who hear about this case, it might deter them from committing the same or similar crime.

            The theory has some merit, but I don't think it offers a comprehensive explanation for how criminals decide to commit crimes. In my opinion, a lot of crime is committed due to lack of impulse control and an inability (or maybe unwillingness) to consider the consequences of one's actions.
            "If you believe, take the first step, it leads to Jesus Christ. If you don't believe, take the first step all the same, for you are bidden to take it. No one wants to know about your faith or unbelief, your orders are to perform the act of obedience on the spot. Then you will find yourself in the situation where faith becomes possible and where faith exists in the true sense of the word." - Dietrich Bonhoeffer, The Cost of Discipleship

            Comment


            • #21
              The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                The bank robbery example was meant for illustrative purposes only but more to the matter at hand; I believe that you left out some pertinent details in order to bolster your argument
                I don't think it matters here, he didn't shoot his friend, they shot no bystanders, residents or any of the cops. They were shooting at them, but none of the cops have been reported shot and killed. It was one of them that got shot, and while that is tragic enough, it just doesn't make sense that one of them should get a murder sentence for that.

                The parallel you made have a person shooting someone. Now if his friend, instead of being shot by the police, instead shot a resident, then that would be different. Then your analogy would be apt, and we would in fact have a situation where it would make sense to claim that he was an accomplice to murder. But the idea that the accidental death of one of them during a shootout with the police constitutes murder does not make any sense.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Littlejoe View Post
                  This is purely a Hypothetical question (I'm not implying this is the case):

                  Would your opinion change if he was the one that convinced all the others to go do the crime with him?
                  No, this would not make it murder.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by myth View Post
                    Potentially, but it seems it would be hard to argue that the crime was the proximate cause of death.
                    I can see no more a reason why a police shooting someone should land the survivor with a charge of murder, than if that person was to drop dead of a heart attack should cause that same person to be given a murder charge. Whether or not it takes part during a burglary.

                    As to what it accomplishes, well....let's see if I remember this right from when I was getting my degree in criminal justice.

                    It's a big-picture question regarding the deterrent effect of incarceration.I believe the term is rational choice theory. I suppose the basic idea is that if there's a threat of more punishment for the crime, it would cause some people to think twice about committing the crime in the first place. The greater the punishment, the higher the deterrent effect. So for the individual defendant in this case, it doesn't really accomplish anything. But for all the would-be criminals who hear about this case, it might deter them from committing the same or similar crime.

                    The theory has some merit, but I don't think it offers a comprehensive explanation for how criminals decide to commit crimes. In my opinion, a lot of crime is committed due to lack of impulse control and an inability (or maybe unwillingness) to consider the consequences of one's actions.
                    I agree with everything you're saying here. It is probably the reasoning behind the enormous penalties involved here. Armed robbery in Denmark for instance only carries a sentence of between 2-5 years.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Leonhard View Post
                      I don't think it matters here, he didn't shoot his friend, they shot no bystanders, residents or any of the cops. They were shooting at them, but none of the cops have been reported shot and killed. It was one of them that got shot, and while that is tragic enough, it just doesn't make sense that one of them should get a murder sentence for that.

                      The parallel you made have a person shooting someone. Now if his friend, instead of being shot by the police, instead shot a resident, then that would be different. Then your analogy would be apt, and we would in fact have a situation where it would make sense to claim that he was an accomplice to murder. But the idea that the accidental death of one of them during a shootout with the police constitutes murder does not make any sense.
                      The only situation where I would agree this was a felony murder is if the accused was the sole participant in the shootout with the police making the other burglars innocent bystanders during the course of this new crime. The question here would be whether the police shootout is a continuation of the burglary in progress.

                      If the only shootout participant is then shot dead, would the non participants be charged with a felony murder? The death is a justifiable homicide. Can a death be both a justifiable homicide and murder? Either the killing was justified or it wasn’t and the death of an innocent bystander will never be justified. The questions here should be what was the main contributing factor leading to the death and how big of a role did the deceased contribute towards his death?

                      Hypothetical - a group of armed men storm a jewellery shop and warn everyone that they will shoot whoever moves. The store manager is in a back room and escapes out of a back door and sprints away in a panic constantly looking behind worried he is being chased. He runs into oncoming traffic and gets hit by a truck and dies. Felony murder?

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Littlejoe View Post
                        If someone dies during the commission of a crime, the person's committing the crime bear the responsibility of that death whether they actually did the killing or not. It's supposed to make you think harder about "simple" crimes like burglary and robbery, where no one is supposed to get hurt....because, people often get hurt or killed during these types of crimes.


                        In legal circles, it's called "acting in concert".
                        The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Leonhard View Post
                          He did not point the gun at his friend or killed him. It is entirely fair game that the police shot one of them in the shoot out. The punishment of murder just doesn't make any sense. This isn't murder. If there's an extra crime for the death I have no word for what it would be. This is a death, during a felony basically. Which carries a murder penalty? Would he also have gotten a murder sentence if his friend had had a heart attack or a stroke?

                          It frankly just doesn't make sense. It might be the name of it.

                          If he had killed a resident he would be guilty of murder, if he had killed a police officer he would have been guilty of murder. If a stray bullet had hit a bystander there's manslaughter of some reckless sort. But his friend dying seems to be an entirely accidental byproduct of what they did, brought on by their own actions.

                          I don't see that as murder.
                          If you get a person killed because of your reckless behavior, that is at the very least manslaughter. In this case it was in the commission of a violent crime, and they shot at the police, which comes with the risk of being killed by the police. He got his friend killed by deliberate violent action. So that is 1st degree murder in my opinion. And the law's opinion.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Leonhard View Post
                            Yeah I think murder should be reserved for a person having an intent to kill either in the moment, or with forethought. To call anything else murder just waters down the term.

                            He already got charged for armed robbery, and for exchanging fire with the police. That one of them died seems to be a not unexpected accident. It is not the fault of the police, but I don't see any reason to punish one of the survivors for it. I'm not sure what this accomplishes as punishment over and above the punishment for armed robbery.

                            As I said if his friend had a heart attack would that have been murder?
                            Shooting at the police should be charged at attempted murder too, right? Attempted murder is up to life imprisonment by itself.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                              If you get a person killed because of your reckless behavior, that is at the very least manslaughter. In this case it was in the commission of a violent crime, and they shot at the police, which comes with the risk of being killed by the police. He got his friend killed by deliberate violent action. So that is 1st degree murder in my opinion. And the law's opinion.
                              So you'd consider the Ahmoud Arbery shooting to be 1st degree murder as well, if it turns out that they were doing an unlawful arrest, which is a felony crime. All three people then, including the guy filming it (who cut off Arbery) would be guilty of 1st degree murder.

                              Interestingly, today of all days, all three men were just indicted on that.

                              https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/n...ce/3253338001/
                              Source: USA Today - Three Georgia men indicted on felony murder, malice charges in Ahmaud Arbery case

                              Three men in Georgia have been indicted on murder charges in the death of Ahmaud Arbery, a prosecutor announced Wednesday.

                              Cobb County District Attorney Joyette Holmes said in a news conference outside the Glynn County Courthouse that a grand jury indicted Travis McMichael, Gregory McMichael and William “Roddie” Bryan Jr. on charges that include felony murder and malice.

                              “This is another positive step, another great step for finding justice for Ahmaud, for finding justice for this family and the community beyond,” Holmes said.

                              © Copyright Original Source


                              I'd consider that going too far here, as death occuring during felony is not a murder.
                              Last edited by Leonhard; 06-25-2020, 01:10 PM.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                                Shooting at the police should be charged at attempted murder too, right? Attempted murder is up to life imprisonment by itself.
                                That is correct. I would consider that perfectly legitimate. If you unlawfully shoot at someone with attempt to kill, that's attempted murder.

                                But if one of them got shot by the police, then the other isn't accomplice to murder. That charge just straight up doesn't make sense. The other one, in participating in the burglary (and perhaps the shootout - though this part is vague) could be said to have brought it on himself, and the police aren't culpable for his death. However the other one in no way had any intention for that person to die. Even if some of their bullets had killed someone else walking down the street, but this was unintentional, I wouldn't consider that as murder.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, 03-27-2024, 04:19 PM
                                16 responses
                                159 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post One Bad Pig  
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                53 responses
                                400 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Mountain Man  
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                25 responses
                                114 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                33 responses
                                198 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Roy
                                by Roy
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                84 responses
                                379 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post JimL
                                by JimL
                                 
                                Working...
                                X