U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-15-2019, 10:54 PM
 
Location: Sarasota FL
6,719 posts, read 8,924,722 times
Reputation: 6340

Advertisements

NY State law- action that cause injury, death to others while in the commission of a crime.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-15-2019, 11:26 PM
 
1,071 posts, read 714,292 times
Reputation: 1635
Quote:
Originally Posted by RageX View Post
If the actions affecting the arrest of a perpetrator of a violent felony in progress cause bystanders, officers or, other perpetrators to become maimed, cripped or, killed, that aforementioned perpetrator shall be charged with the felony assault and / or negligent homicide of the injured / murdered parties.

Pretty ironclad.
Legality and morality line up rather evenly with this law.

Also, I don't know how this can be misunderstood**.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ClaraC View Post
I"m not a fan of ramping up charges beyond what a person actually does.

This guy robbed and incited violence by appearing to point a gun at a cop.

He didn't kill anyone.
The charges were not ramped up, these are default charges for deaths resulting from the commission of a felony.

**You misunderstood...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-15-2019, 11:50 PM
 
17,222 posts, read 18,628,480 times
Reputation: 25009
Quote:
Originally Posted by sylentvoyce View Post
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/crime-c...uspect-n971396

Ok. Here is the summary of the above article link. Two NYC Detectives respond to a robbery in progress. Other Officers eventually join them. The robber is in a store robbing it. He decides to advance to the front of the store holding a fake gun. Definitely looked real. Police fired 42 shots, and accidentally kill one of the Detectives themselves. They also wound the robber, whom they quickly apprehend.

Here is the discussion I'm interested in starting up. I am pro police. But I also like to try to be critical of certain police actions, within some particular personal belief confines. Having said that...

I support the shooting itself, the gun looked real, the robber was aggressively advancing, the decision was one of those split second decisions that needed to be made. However, they are charging the robber with murder as well as the robbery because of the Detective's death.

I am going to boldly state that I think that is wrong. Is the death tragic, yes. Did the robbers actions lead to this shooting occurring, yes. But I still feel that tacking on charges because of your own poor shooting skills is a little petty.

Any thoughts, debates, arguments, and insults are all welcome.


For the same reason if you knew of a murder and said nothing you’ll be charged as a accessory the robber caused the shooting. Makes no difference how the detective dies. He could of slipped and fell on the curb cracked his noggin. He dies the robber gets charged.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2019, 12:04 AM
 
879 posts, read 233,669 times
Reputation: 653
It seems like this would fall under "aggravated manslaughter"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2019, 12:41 AM
 
Location: Washington State
106 posts, read 75,332 times
Reputation: 283
Great discussion everyone!

The real debate here seems to lie at the boundary of the law vs actions taken.

We all understand at this point that the law says murder charges are warranted for this situation.
However, as an act of morality; I still feel that applying these charges, while well intentioned, are still wrong.

Police have a huge amount of leeway. While a majority can arguably be trusted, there is still a notable percentage who cannot. If Police shooting down partners, shooting down bystanders, crashing into buildings, or breaking into random homes can all be laid on the offender in the name of: Outcomes that resulted from your actions; then we have a genuinely slippery slope.

At what point do we hold police accountable for their mayhem when all the blame can just be conveniently placed on the offender?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2019, 01:13 AM
 
Location: Eugene, Oregon
8,067 posts, read 2,564,681 times
Reputation: 11339
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dwatted Wabbit View Post
I've read that the NYPD is pretty lightweight on marksmanship and combat shooting practice and training. There's only one excuse for that, the idiot at the top.

I've also read that playing violent (aka shoot-em-up) video games can provide better accuracy training than live fire.
https://www.livescience.com/19984-vi...-accuracy.html

Of course, there's no training that fully prepares you for the full tilt boogie live fire/real life action. Some people are very cool under fire, some get wiggy and shake like a leaf. No way to predict those.

This is a tragic event. The one who fired the kill shot needs a good look too. It's not unheard of for a "friendly fire" incident to be someone taking the opportunity to dispatch someone they don't like. See "Serpico" for details.

Someone wasn't paying attention to the combat placement of the cops. That's the senior or commanding officer's responsibility. Obviously you never never ever ever have a friendly in your line of fire.

That's where Al Capp got some of the ideas for his cartoon character of Fearless Fosdick, who drilled more innocent bystanders, than criminals.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fearless_Fosdick

Last edited by Steve McDonald; 02-16-2019 at 01:32 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2019, 01:50 AM
 
12,139 posts, read 9,996,673 times
Reputation: 16701
Quote:
Originally Posted by sylentvoyce View Post
Great discussion everyone!

The real debate here seems to lie at the boundary of the law vs actions taken.

We all understand at this point that the law says murder charges are warranted for this situation.
However, as an act of morality; I still feel that applying these charges, while well intentioned, are still wrong.

Police have a huge amount of leeway. While a majority can arguably be trusted, there is still a notable percentage who cannot. If Police shooting down partners, shooting down bystanders, crashing into buildings, or breaking into random homes can all be laid on the offender in the name of: Outcomes that resulted from your actions; then we have a genuinely slippery slope.

At what point do we hold police accountable for their mayhem when all the blame can just be conveniently placed on the offender?
Idk about that concern here. The law on felony murder is pretty settled and straightforward, since it has roots in common law and is quite old. It is limited - like, it only applies to inherently dangerous felonies, so ones where a resulting death or at least injury from the crime and circumstances would not be surprising. The rule is intended to be a deterrent to committing such felonies, where you put others at serious risk. States don't really expand its scope, and another rule typically is that the link between the felony and death, including timing, cannot be too attenuated. Given its limits and how it's an old rule, the "slippery slope" would have happened by now - unless a situation like this is it to you, but this type of situation - someone else causing a death during the felony itself - is nothing new and has been addressed by various courts, and yes, it basically is a morality question because the law is clear, so the question is whether it should be limited more.

Robbery is a classic inherently dangerous felony. This guy robbed a store with a fake gun, that looked very real even to the police, he put himself and others, including the police, into a very dangerous situation, no surprise shots were fired. It's just a shame someone (a cop no less) died - but it was a possibility when this guy decided to commit this type of crime, with a very realistic fake weapon that anyone would mistake as real and increase the risk of overall danger, that someone could wind up dying.

It may be fairer in some circumstances at least for felony murder to not automatically result in first or second degree murder punishments, as it does I think in basically every US jurisdiction if not every one, but for some lesser degree that still takes in the death but downgraded because of lack of intent to kill. I wouldn't be against that, but I would not rid of the rule altogether, personally.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2019, 05:26 AM
 
Location: Washington State
106 posts, read 75,332 times
Reputation: 283
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerseyGirl415 View Post
Idk about that concern here. The law on felony murder is pretty settled and straightforward, since it has roots in common law and is quite old. It is limited - like, it only applies to inherently dangerous felonies, so ones where a resulting death or at least injury from the crime and circumstances would not be surprising. The rule is intended to be a deterrent to committing such felonies, where you put others at serious risk. States don't really expand its scope, and another rule typically is that the link between the felony and death, including timing, cannot be too attenuated. Given its limits and how it's an old rule, the "slippery slope" would have happened by now - unless a situation like this is it to you, but this type of situation - someone else causing a death during the felony itself - is nothing new and has been addressed by various courts, and yes, it basically is a morality question because the law is clear, so the question is whether it should be limited more.

Robbery is a classic inherently dangerous felony. This guy robbed a store with a fake gun, that looked very real even to the police, he put himself and others, including the police, into a very dangerous situation, no surprise shots were fired. It's just a shame someone (a cop no less) died - but it was a possibility when this guy decided to commit this type of crime, with a very realistic fake weapon that anyone would mistake as real and increase the risk of overall danger, that someone could wind up dying.

It may be fairer in some circumstances at least for felony murder to not automatically result in first or second degree murder punishments, as it does I think in basically every US jurisdiction if not every one, but for some lesser degree that still takes in the death but downgraded because of lack of intent to kill. I wouldn't be against that, but I would not rid of the rule altogether, personally.
I can agree and meet with you in the middle on the statement: a downgrade to the charges because of lack of intent to kill.

However, for the rest of the above argument, I usually argue with a saying that I'd heard a few years ago: Tradition, just because you have always done it that way does not mean it is intelligent.

I understand that the current manifestation of this law is rooted in common law but again I have to argue that at its core, it is a faulty law. When I use the term slippery slope, I am indeed implying that police can act with some disregard to their surroundings in stopping a crime. A tragedy can occur and they can just say, "Well if this perp hadn't tried to rob a store we wouldn't have accidentally shot you all."

Fortunately, (disclaimer: this is the start of a sarcastic paragraph) the unfortunate death was not an employee or a customer of the store, it was not some child or innocent bystander, it was one of their own police officers. Even though the criminal is taken care of, and the precedent of law keeps this case "ironclad", the ironic lesson here is: If you're gonna start busting off caps with the intention of piling blame onto the suspect, don't be surprised about who actually ends up dead. (End of sarcastic paragraph.)

All in all, it's still a tough situation, and one of those shooting officers is going to be living the rest of his life with some weight on his shoulders and doubt in his mind.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2019, 05:26 AM
 
5,425 posts, read 2,455,974 times
Reputation: 13855
In the simplest of forms: Not my bullet, not my gun. Maintain Innocence til your life is done.

So tired of "in the line of duty" "friendly fire" being exceptions. Pat Tilmans Family certainly would be open to this discussion as to at what point is the person who is Holding, aiming, firing and killing the target accountable?

The laws are so bias in favor of law enforcement.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2019, 07:50 AM
 
Location: Swiftwater, PA
14,015 posts, read 11,126,499 times
Reputation: 10344
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nov3 View Post
In the simplest of forms: Not my bullet, not my gun. Maintain Innocence til your life is done.

So tired of "in the line of duty" "friendly fire" being exceptions. Pat Tilmans Family certainly would be open to this discussion as to at what point is the person who is Holding, aiming, firing and killing the target accountable?

The laws are so bias in favor of law enforcement.
Would you favor the criminals in charge? Society needs a counterbalance. The police, in this case, did not set the stage that led to the death of the other detective. Only the robber is guilty of that.

As much as you are tired of hearing about friendly fire; it is not new: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List...fire_incidents. Think of the days before uniforms and how hard it was to distinguish friend from foe - especially when everybody was swinging swords and axes. Today's military is trying to address these problems with night vision that has flash identification of our own: https://www.quora.com/How-do-soldier...ity-conditions. They are also working on smart honing bullets that could be 'locked' on to the bad guys.

But war and law enforcement is not a perfect science. Criminals look for opportunities and there will always be situations that spiral out of control. At least our police scrutinize every single bullet they fire and try to do a better job the next time. The criminals do not worry; they will do whatever it takes to commit their crime.

Last edited by fisheye; 02-16-2019 at 08:21 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top