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.
Moral of the story: Don't make burglary a career choice.
Alternate moral of the story: If you are going to make burglary a career choice, don't break into a house where someone has a semi automatic gun at the ready.
She shouldn't be charged with any murder unless it can be proved she knew the house was dangerous to rob.
I wonder what's the maximum years she can get for burglary. There has to be some reason for them to pursue this with the first degree charge.
I think this stretch of the law, extending murder charges to all who have any connection to a crime that leaves someone dead, should be ended. Charges should be appropriate for each person's involvement and provable intent. It gives too much power to police and prosecutors, as it is now. Many people are spending 20 years in prison, who had no idea a crime was planned, but happened to be riding in the wrong car.
The most successful prosecutors are those whose hearts are filled with malice for their fellow human beings. They have too many opportunities to serve their own careers, at the expense of the lives of others. The adversarial system of prosecution, is just plain wrong. No prosecutor should be allowed to demonize a defendant, but just to present the evidence. If prosecutors ever falsify or magnify anything to get convictions, they should be the ones serving long terms in prison.
2nd degree. There was no first degree murder. Noone planned a murder which is what 1st degree is. If you want her to stay in jail just charge her correctly with a bunch of charges and make the terms consecutive and maximum. Problem solved without diluting the meaning of 1st degree murder. Should the consecutive terms not be long enough, change the law on second degree murder to allow the possibility of a longer sentence.
Words mean things. I realize this is controversial here with gross misuse of terms, socialist, communist, marxist, fascist, nazi.
you dont have to plan a murder to be charged with first degree murder. in this case the girl was in on the planning of the crime, and the result of that crime was a death. that alone allows for first degree murder charges, in this case three counts.
you can also be charged with first degree murder if you kill a cop, even though you didnt plan to.
So if the robbers took Uber to the crime and the criminals told the driver to "stay here, we will be right back", the driver should also be charged? What if the criminals jumped on a city bus after the robbery? Should all the passengers be charged as accessories?
You might try doing more than using the think emoticon and actually think. An Uber or bus driver is hardly a knowing accomplice, is he? Why do liberals go to such extreme lengths to try and protect criminals over and over and over.
Am I the only one that thinks its dumb to charge her with that? There are tons of things you can charge her with but we are diluting the meaning of 1st degree murder. Why not just call everything 1st degree murder.
I tend to agree. It seems to be tied into the "no tolerance" mentality. "No tolerance" policies are created because those in charge of enforcement are too incompetent to make a rational decision. I think charging this woman with triple 1st degree murder is irrational as it comes.
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.