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.
I wasn't familiar with the case until just now, but yes, I think he should be in prison for the exact reasons stated by the ASA in the article you linked.
Without the guy's car, there would have been no crime. Evidently, it was proven that he had prior knowledge that the others were planning to use his car in the commission of their crime, and he lent it to them anyway. Not quite Aiding & Abetting, but pretty damn close. With the limited information provided, I'd say that he could have prevented the crime from happening by not lending his car. He lent it anyway, even though he knew what the others were planning to do, so he should be punished accordingly.
I don't think he should be given a life sentence because it's very debatable whether or not he actually knew or took those guys seriously when they told him of their "plans". He had been drinking and parting so his judgement wasn't clear. Plus he wasn't actually there with them.
According to the doctrine, everyone on the highway should be given a ticket when one person is getting a ticket because they aided in increasing the average speed.
No, of course he shouldn't be charged and sentenced to life. That's just stupid, especially with the evidence provided in this case. The person(s) committing the crime hold the guilt, not someone who gives them an accessory.
If the police ask if you lent your car or gun or whatever to someone, you say "hell no, they stole it from me. I just discovered it gone this morning."
In this case, the law (as Mr Bumble said) is indeed an ass.
If this car had broken down on the way to the scene of the crime, and someone had stopped and helped these men to fix the car, the person, according to the law in Florida would be just as guilty as Mr Holle,
because he helped them travel to the crime scene.
And the moral of this story is, never lend anything to a person living in florida.
In this case, the law (as Mr Bumble said) is indeed an ass.
If this car had broken down on the way to the scene of the crime, and someone had stopped and helped these men to fix the car, the person, according to the law in Florida would be just as guilty as Mr Holle,
because he helped them travel to the crime scene.
And the moral of this story is, never lend anything to a person living in florida.
No, and I hope you are more logical than that in your daily life. If a stranger helped them, without any knowledge of their destination or intent, they are not guilty, and could could not be construed as accomplices. The determining factor here is that he KNEW about their intended actions, and provided the means for them to carry them out.
If your friend asked to borrow your gun so he could kill his boss, would you lend it to him?
Think!
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.
