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.
What you are missing is that the jury gets to vote guilty or not guilty and no judge can force them to go one way or the other. Jury nullification happens.
It sure does, and in this area it results in murderers being released back into the community. I guess that's an acceptable price to make a "statement".
1st degree murder seems like the wrong charge. It's not like we're talking about premeditated murder here.
It's not like it really matters though. Being that this isn't her first run in with the law, 3 counts of manslaughter along with her other chargers would put her away for at least 30 years. She'd be an old lady when she got out anyways.
The prison system is worthless in regards to people doing long sentences or life. They should just take these people and put them on an island somewhere and let them live in anarchy ala Escape from New York. It's not like they will ever be able to function in society. Why waste the money on them? If they want to live like animals, let them live like animals.
It sure does, and in this area it results in murderers being released back into the community. I guess that's an acceptable price to make a "statement".
Right or wrong, juries have long made statements. That's all I am trying to say.
It sure does, and in this area it results in murderers being released back into the community. I guess that's an acceptable price to make a "statement".
No, jury nullification does not cause guilty murderers to be released and you have no proof.
You're a little late for that. The felony murder rule has been around for hundreds of years.
It's really simple: if you don't intend any and all of the foreseeable consequences of a dangerous felony, then don't participate in dangerous felonies.
You didn't say anything except it's the law. Nothing about a just law or how the driver in this case is responsible for something she had no involvement in. Just because.
Last edited by Loveshiscountry; 04-01-2017 at 08:28 PM..
I have already read "Crime and Punishment" people engaging in felonies where they know that someone could get killed deserve a murder charge. What makes her crime more heinous is two of the three deceased individuals were minors.
Now the fact a non-felon committed the killing might get her reduced charges. From criminal.lawyer.com
Quote:
Limits on the Rule: When Non-Felons Kill
Targets of assaults, robberies, and other crimes very often fight back, sometimes with weapons and with resulting homicides. What role should the felony murder rule play when, for example, a victim shoots back and kills one of multiple assailants, or accidentally kills a bystander? May surviving assailants be charged under the felony murder rule for these deaths?
These deaths certainly occurred during the commission of a felony – but they did not occur in furtherance of it, which is the limiting consideration that many courts will apply to scenarios like this. Courts that adopt this approach will apply it to a killing committed by a policeman or a bystander, too, and will not allow a charge of felony murder. But notice that this limit applies only to non-felons. When an accomplice of the defendant does the killing, the killer is considered an agent of the defendant, who becomes responsible for the agent’s acts.
That isn't an example of jury nullification. That was just a not-guilty verdict.
Jury nullification has historically happened when the jury doesn't believe that the punishment fits the crime.
This case is a prime example of the potential punishment not fitting the crime. They will likely acquit her of murder charges, but convict her of other charges. Though I doubt it will even go to trial.
I have already read "Crime and Punishment" people engaging in felonies where they know that someone could get killed deserve a murder charge. What makes her crime more heinous is two of the three deceased individuals were minors.
To be fair, you don't know the role she played. Or why she was even playing it.
If she pushed them to rob the house, it would be one thing. But in most cases where someone is the get-away driver, it's because they are the only one who has a car, and they've been kind of pushed and nagged into doing it.
You need to actually imagine yourself in her shoes before you pass judgement.
Do you honestly think she deserves to go to prison for the rest of her life for this crime? How many years would she get with three murder charges and an armed robbery charge?
You know there are actual murderers and rapists who would be doing a fraction of the time she would. Is that justice?
If you were a betting man, what do you think the odds are she would even be convicted on the three charges of first-degree murder?
Basically, how many people are like you?
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.
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.
