- 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: Sentenced to Life for an Accident Miles Away
Posted on 12/13/23 at 9:35 am to olgoi khorkhoi
Posted on 12/13/23 at 9:35 am to olgoi khorkhoi
quote:
If the guy had escaped the police, fled into the mountains and set up camp and killed hundreds of hikers over the course of decades, the dipshits here would be calling the guy who surrendered on the scene a serial killer.
Where do you people come up with this fantasy? No one has said this and the law doesn't even say this.
Most of these laws have a variation of "during the commission of a crime" in them. They do not say "liable in perpetuity for all further actions of accomplice"
2
Posted on 12/13/23 at 9:35 am to Bourre
quote:
Makes as much sense as you downplaying burglary so it fits your narrative
Are you expecting a reasonable response regarding criminal activity to someone who bragged about banging a thug who then proceeded to steal her bike?
Seriously?
You're dealing with a Liberal Woman so the chances that she is NOT on heavy Meds for all sorts of made up maladies is exactly zero.
Posted on 12/13/23 at 9:35 am to Powerman
quote:
The question no one can answer. But some butterfly effect scenario remders him guilty is the logic being used because of his criminal past. It's not very solid reasoning.
Charge his parents with murder because if they wouldn’t have procreated this never would have happened!
Posted on 12/13/23 at 9:36 am to Robin Masters
quote:
Charge his parents with murder because if they wouldn’t have procreated this never would have happened!
No, but we CAN stop paying people to breed these idiots....
Posted on 12/13/23 at 9:37 am to stout
quote:
Most of these laws have a variation of "during the commission of a crime" in them. They do not say "liable in perpetuity for all further actions of accomplice"
And the commission of the crime was running. Not theft. He was caught. A new crime was being perpetrated which he was not a part of.
Posted on 12/13/23 at 9:37 am to Robin Masters
quote:
Charge his parents with murder because if they wouldn’t have procreated this never would have happened!
And if procreating was a felony that they were engaged in, you'd have a point.
Since it's not, though...
Posted on 12/13/23 at 9:38 am to oogabooga68
quote:
No, but we CAN stop paying people to breed these idiots....
So you’re saying charge the tax payers who fund welfare with murder?
I kid of course.
Posted on 12/13/23 at 9:38 am to Robin Masters
quote:
Is he guilty of murder? No.
Wrong. He 100% is. He is an accomplice that led to the death of another person.
quote:
But again, your analogy leaves out the crucial bit which was they murder occurred during the commission of a separate crime which only one is guilty of. (Running).
Here is the law for you
quote:
The unlawful killing of a human being, when perpetrated by any act imminently dangerous to another and evincing a depraved mind regardless of human life, although without any premeditated design to effect the death of any particular individual, is murder in the second degree and constitutes a felony of the first degree, punishable by imprisonment for a term of years not exceeding life or as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
(3) When a human being is killed during the perpetration of, or during the attempt to perpetrate, any:
(a) Trafficking offense prohibited by s. 893.135(1),
(b) Arson,
(c) Sexual battery,
(d) Robbery,
(e) Burglary,
(f) Kidnapping,
(g) Escape,
(h) Aggravated child abuse,
(i) Aggravated abuse of an elderly person or disabled adult,
(j) Aircraft piracy,
(k) Unlawful throwing, placing, or discharging of a destructive device or bomb,
(l) Carjacking,
(m) Home-invasion robbery,
(n) Aggravated stalking,
(o) Murder of another human being,
(p) Aggravated fleeing or eluding with serious bodily injury or death,
(q) Resisting an officer with violence to his or her person, or
(r) Felony that is an act of terrorism or is in furtherance of an act of terrorism, including a felony under
LINK
The law clarifies that it would need to be during the crime. Not a year later like your fantasy
Was the chase immediately after the robbery?
This post was edited on 12/13/23 at 9:43 am
Posted on 12/13/23 at 9:39 am to Robin Masters
quote:
A new crime was being perpetrated which he was not a part of.
And that would be your argument as the defense attorney. If I were the prosecutor, I would argue that the crime of conspiracy was ongoing and had linked their actions.
I think either is a valid legal theory and it would be up to the jury to decide.
Posted on 12/13/23 at 9:40 am to Robin Masters
quote:
And the commission of the crime was running. Not theft.
Not according to the law I just linked for you, pal.
Posted on 12/13/23 at 9:41 am to oogabooga68
quote:
No, but we CAN stop paying people to breed these idiots....
I actually believe we should do just the opposite. We should pay them money every year between the ages of 12 and 21 to NOT have kids.
Posted on 12/13/23 at 9:42 am to olgoi khorkhoi
It’s always funny to hear leftist call people government boot lickers when y’all cheer on government overreach and prosecution when it comes to people you disagree with politically or because of the color of the perpetrator’s skin
This is why it’s hard to take activist like 4commies serious when it comes to discussions like this topic. If y’all were consistent, we could make meaningful changes to the law. But y’all aren’t consistent and aren’t interested in reform, only political power for your side
This is why it’s hard to take activist like 4commies serious when it comes to discussions like this topic. If y’all were consistent, we could make meaningful changes to the law. But y’all aren’t consistent and aren’t interested in reform, only political power for your side
This post was edited on 12/13/23 at 9:51 am
Posted on 12/13/23 at 9:42 am to stout
The felony murder usually makes sense. It does not under these circumstances. The District Attorney is giving wide discretion . Most would not seek life under these circumstances.
Posted on 12/13/23 at 9:42 am to stout
quote:
The law clarifies "immediately". Not a year later like your fantasy
Looks like is specifically says “during”. Dude surrendered. The crime of theft was over.
How long until you are absolved of being an accomplice? Please be specific.
Posted on 12/13/23 at 9:43 am to Robin Masters
quote:
Looks like is specifically says “during”. Dude surrendered. The crime of theft was over.
How long until you are absolved of being an accomplice? Please be specific.
Posted on 12/13/23 at 9:44 am to Robin Masters
quote:
The crime of theft was over.
No. The crime of theft wasn't over until all involved were arrested. That is how conspiracy crimes work.
Posted on 12/13/23 at 9:44 am to 4cubbies
Boo hoo from "The New Yorker". I didn't read that shite and I don't give a flying frick. The moral of the story is you live a life of crime and bad shite, even "unfair" bad shite, will happen to you.
Posted on 12/13/23 at 9:45 am to 4cubbies
quote:
So why weren’t the police charged?
Holy frick you are stupid.
Posted on 12/13/23 at 9:45 am to stout
quote:
No. The crime of theft wasn't over until all involved were arrested. That is how conspiracy crimes work.
Thank you.
You beat me to correcting this idiot.
Page 15 of 31
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News