James Fields convicted of first-degree murder in Charlottesville car attack (money, supporters)

[NomadicDrifter]

Originally Posted by jojajn

What he did was an act of terrorism.

That presupposes you know his motive, are you God?

[jojajn]

Originally Posted by NomadicDrifter

That presupposes you know his motive, are you God?

Not god, just have access to internet Wikipedia.

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

[NomadicDrifter]

Originally Posted by jojajn

Not god, just have access to internet Wikipedia.

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

Well then learn how to read the wikipedia article.

[texan2yankee]

Originally Posted by Pruzhany

James Fields convicted of first-degree murder in Charlottesville car attack.

As OnOurWayHome said succinctly on page 1 of this thread:

Good.

[subaru5555]

Originally Posted by NomadicDrifter

That presupposes you know his motive, are you God?

Enjoy the accidental rep. The position you’re attempting to argue from is ludicrous.

[Dane_in_LA]

Originally Posted by rstevens62

I dont understand how they impose those other charges, when you look at 'failing to stop at an accident involving a death'...that is essentially part of the original act he committed, driving into the crowd was the crime, imposing numerous other charges implies he did these things separately, which he did not, it was all one act/one crime.


If they are charging murder 1 for the act of driving into the crowd and someone dying as a result...fine, but they cant also impose other charges, which were part of the same crime/act as the murder 1 charge...?

Sure they can, plenty of precedent for lesser included charges.

[NomadicDrifter]

Originally Posted by subaru5555

Enjoy the accidental rep. The position you’re attempting to argue from is ludicrous.

What position am I attempting to argue from> Be specific. Don't expect me to read minds - like everyone here seems to be re Fields.

[subaru5555]

Originally Posted by NomadicDrifter

What position am I attempting to argue from> Be specific. Don't expect me to read minds - like everyone here seems to be re Fields.

One from which youre attempting to create doubt in regards to this topic. Obviously.

[Dane_in_LA]

Originally Posted by NomadicDrifter

That presupposes you know his motive, are you God?

Another poster decides to carry James Fields' water?

Trials hand out sentences based on motive all the time. The defendant's state of mind can completely make the difference between justifiable self-defense vs. murder.

[NomadicDrifter]

Originally Posted by subaru5555

One from which youre attempting to create doubt in regards to this topic. Obviously.

I'm not trying to create doubt, I'm saying there is doubt, because every thinking adult who watched that video has doubt just what Fields was trying to do. I know you're a bunch of blood hungry hyenas whipped into a frenzy, but I'm too much of a thoughtful person to participate.

When I watch that video I see what easily could be anything from aggravated manslaughter to premeditated murder. But the justice system, in spirit of beyond a reasonable doubt, should err on the side of aggravated manslaughter. I'm not convinced he thought he was going to kill someone. And I don't even know if I agree with him spending the rest of his life behind bars. For me, I think 10-20 years is an appropriate sentence.