- 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: No Murder Charge for Robber Who Allegedly Shot Clerk Dead
Posted on 12/2/22 at 10:42 am to djmed
Posted on 12/2/22 at 10:42 am to djmed
This is some liberal mental gymnastics. Anytime someone dies in the commission of a felony it’s suppose to be 1st degree murder, especially during an armed robbery.
This post was edited on 12/2/22 at 10:42 am
1
Posted on 12/2/22 at 10:42 am to djmed
Need to go back to the old west style of justice. Put people down in the street like dogs.
Posted on 12/2/22 at 10:43 am to djmed
quote:
Contra Costa District Attorney Diana Becton issued a statement on the charges, saying based on law, a person cannot pursue another to retrieve stolen property once the threat of bodily injury or harm to the victim has subsided.
Posted on 12/2/22 at 10:45 am to lsufball19
quote:
In this situation, yes.
I agree that it was no longer self defense for the clerk but he’s dead, and that’s a separate issue from “was someone killed during a felony”. If you’re fleeing from the scene of the felony you’re still in the process IMO. Trying to get away is a pretty integral part of any robbery.
Posted on 12/2/22 at 10:45 am to lsufball19
quote:
A better question is does the state think justice was served here under the law or were they more worried about their conviction rate?
I didn't read the article, but they are still pursuing the armed robber charges, right?
Posted on 12/2/22 at 10:49 am to nes2010
quote:And there we have it.
Contra Costa District Attorney Diana Becton issued a statement on the charges, saying based on law, a person cannot pursue another to retrieve stolen property once the threat of bodily injury or harm to the victim has subsided.
Whether WE outside California like it or not, under California law the clerk was acting outside the law when he fired upon the thief.
WE may not like it, but it sounds like the decision not to pursue murder charges will hold water under California law.
Do not live in California, if you do not like California law.
The thread will now devolve into competing posts about how bad California law is and into further insults of yours truly.
Enjoy.
Posted on 12/2/22 at 10:54 am to AggieHank86
quote:
IF the original felony is defined as being complete, he would not have still been engaged in a felony when he fired the shots.
I don't think it would be. I read an example from a group of CA attorneys writing an article about the new Felony Murder Law in CA (maybe changed around 2020). They cited an example of someone running over an innocent bystander while fleeing from an armed robbery. If driving a car to get away doesn't get you out of it, I doubt shooting a gun at someone while fleeing would. That being said, it looks like when they were updating their felony murder law they were doing so to make it harder to convict criminals of first degree murder under felony murder
Posted on 12/2/22 at 10:55 am to nes2010
No mystery here. From wiki.
quote:
The Mercury News noted that her election victory made her "the first African-American and first woman to be elected DA in the office’s roughly 160-year history".[14] Becton's campaign received support from a consortium of social justice groups, Democratic activists, and wealthy funders including George Soros.[15][16
Posted on 12/2/22 at 10:55 am to AggieHank86
quote:
The thread will now devolve into competing posts about how bad California law is and into further insults of yours truly.
You need to see a Dr. about that Martyr Complex of yours, Miss.....
A whole lot of "couch time" would do you wonders....
Posted on 12/2/22 at 10:56 am to AggieHank86
quote:
Do not live in California, if you do not like California law.
This.
Posted on 12/2/22 at 10:56 am to AggieHank86
quote:
And there we have it.
Whether WE outside California like it or not, under California law the clerk was acting outside the law when he fired upon the thief.
WE may not like it, but it sounds like the decision not to pursue murder charges will hold water under California law.
That doesn't necessarily mean the DA is making the correct legal decision. He just knows his constituency won't care
Posted on 12/2/22 at 10:58 am to jchamil
quote:
He just knows his constituency won't care
She, not he. Black female Soros social justice warrior.
Posted on 12/2/22 at 11:02 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I didn't read the article, but they are still pursuing the armed robber charges, right?
I'd assume so, but depending upon the guys prior record, he could negotiate a plea for no jail time on a robbery charge. I'm not seeing anything in the California code for armed robbery being an aggravating factor, only use of force or fear but that's a required element of robbery in general. The only aggravating factor I'm seeing is where it happened.
In this case, it would probably be second degree robbery. CA code says a first degree robbery is one where the robbery in an inhabited dwelling or building (IOW where people live), against someone driving a commercial vehicle, or against someone using an ATM machine. Second degree robbery covers all other robberies.
Sentencing guidelines for first degree are 3,4, or 6 years in prison or, if acting in concert with another person, 3, 6, or 9 years in prison. Second degree robbery is 2, 3, or 5 years in prison.
Looking at those ridiculous laws and sentencing guidelines for robbery in CA, I could easily see this dude serving all of his sentence on probation.
This post was edited on 12/2/22 at 11:04 am
Posted on 12/2/22 at 11:04 am to AggieHank86
quote:
IF the original felony is defined as being complete, he would not have still been engaged in a felony when he fired the shots.
That’s a BIG IF.
Running away from the scene of an armed robbery, ostensibly with the ill gotten loot and firearm still in hand, where your apprehension or at least identification is still a possibility, is still an integral part of the robbery itself. The robber is still highly dangerous at its apex, even as the threat is potentially waning.
Posted on 12/2/22 at 11:04 am to lsufball19
quote:
so there was no longer a threat.
This doesn't make sense to me. Unless the guy dropped his weapon, it seems that a guy that just committed an armed robbery is a threat to anybody he encounters while the gun is still in his hand.
Posted on 12/2/22 at 11:10 am to Townedrunkard
quote:
Anytime someone dies in the commission of a felony it’s suppose to be 1st degree murder
Depends on the felony they were in the act of committing. In my state, those felonies that would escalate a felony 2nd degree murder to a 1st degree murder are rape, robbery, burglary, arson, terrorism, aggravated child abuse, and/or aggravated child neglect. California is also a state where a murder in the commission of a robbery would be 1st degree, but all murders committed in the act of any felony are not necessarily 1st degree charges. However, I don't know of any states where armed robbery isn't one of the felonies that would enhance a felony murder to first degree.
Posted on 12/2/22 at 11:12 am to David_DJS
quote:
This doesn't make sense to me. Unless the guy dropped his weapon, it seems that a guy that just committed an armed robbery is a threat to anybody he encounters while the gun is still in his hand.
Nope.
There has never been a case in all of recorded History of a bad guy leaving the scene of a crime and returning to kill the victims...never, not once...../s
Posted on 12/2/22 at 11:13 am to lsufball19
quote:Solid analysis, but it does not answer the question of whether (under California law) he was still engaged in the original felony at the time of the shooting. If not, it seems to me that felony murder rules would not even be remotely applicable.
Depends on the felony they were in the act of committing. In my state, those felonies that would escalate a felony 2nd degree murder to a 1st degree murder are rape, robbery, burglary, arson, terrorism, aggravated child abuse, and/or aggravated child neglect. California is also a state where a murder in the commission of a robbery would be 1st degree, but all murders committed in the act of any felony are not necessarily 1st degree charges. However, I don't know of any states where armed robbery isn't one of the felonies that would enhance a felony murder to first degree.
Posted on 12/2/22 at 11:15 am to David_DJS
quote:
Unless the guy dropped his weapon, it seems that a guy that just committed an armed robbery is a threat to anybody he encounters while the gun is still in his hand.
I agree, but the way the California laws are written, you could argue it was a murder in self-defense of other people, but that defense attorney would likely argue that there was no specific person anyone could identify the clerk was protecting at that point, especially if the robber was no longer brandishing the firearm and had put it back into concealment while running away.
That said, it's not black and white, and I think the DA owes it to the victim and the people of CA to let a jury of his peers make that call and not dismiss it because they're fearful of not getting a conviction. If he were to be acquitted by a jury, then so be it, but simply dismissing a murder charge of someone who just held up a convenience store won't and shouldn't sit right with anyone. There's way too many shades of grey and arguments to be made for that to have been their decision.
This post was edited on 12/2/22 at 11:16 am
Posted on 12/2/22 at 11:15 am to Jimbeaux
quote:Yes, it is.
IF the original felony is defined as being complete, he would not have still been engaged in a felony when he fired the shots.quote:
That’s a BIG IF.
but as I read the statement from the DA, California law does seem to indicate that the crime would be deemed to have been complete by the time of the shooting.
Page 2 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News