- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Why is the US scared to charge the Oklahoma beheader with terrorism?
Posted on 10/1/14 at 8:03 am to The Mick
Posted on 10/1/14 at 8:03 am to The Mick
quote:you're basically putting this on the prosecution to prove beyond any reasonable doubt.
(5) the term “domestic terrorism” means activities that— [b](A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State; (B) appear to be intended— (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and (C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States
or the prosecution could just prove that this dude murdered someone....
2
Posted on 10/1/14 at 8:06 am to Pilot Tiger
I heard this on the radio yesterday... why the state of OK was hesitant to bring up charges of terrorism. This is the OKLAHOMA definition of terrorism:
They can't prove this definition beyond a reasonable doubt so why bother prosecuting it in that direction. They're going to go after a charge that they know will stand up in court... murder.
Now depending on the federal definition, there could be charges brought against him at that level for terrorism.
quote:
“Terrorism” means an act of violence resulting in damage to property or personal injury perpetrated to coerce a civilian population or government into granting illegal political or economic demands; or conduct intended to incite violence in order to create apprehension of bodily injury or damage to property in order to coerce a civilian population or government into granting illegal political or economic demands.
They can't prove this definition beyond a reasonable doubt so why bother prosecuting it in that direction. They're going to go after a charge that they know will stand up in court... murder.
Now depending on the federal definition, there could be charges brought against him at that level for terrorism.
Posted on 10/1/14 at 8:07 am to Pilot Tiger
quote:You can be charged with multiple offenses. But, it might be easier the way you're saying so that's possible for sure.
you're basically putting this on the prosecution to prove beyond any reasonable doubt.
or the prosecution could just prove that this dude murdered someone....
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News