|
Deadly accident prompts call for engine limitation, age restrictions for boaters
"Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote in message
. .. JoeSpareBedroom wrote: "Chuck Gould" wrote in message oups.com... On Oct 30, 12:58?pm, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: "Ernest Scribbler" wrote in message et... "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote Drama? Yes, drama. I can't say what the guy's intentions were when he took 19 year-old Nicole for a ride in his big fast boat, but I wouldn't want to be the prosecutor who tries to prove that killing people was what he had in mind. The DA who did it near here used the tactic so the murderer could only plea bargain for the next worst thing: Maximum sentence for vehicular manslaughter. He put the woman away for something like 22 years. Without the option to charge her with murder, she could've bargained for quite a bit less. The jury did not have a problem with the idea of intent, by the way. You might, but they didn't, according to interviews after the trial. The drunk driver's intent was really just to get home without getting caught. The jury had to be dumb as a box of rocks if they "almost" went for it. Can you picture some guy in a bar getting deliberately loaded so that he'd cause an accident and kill somebody? Drunk driving or boating is a very serious offense. First time offenders should be slapped pretty hard, and repeat offenders should do some serious time.....however, if the offense goes beyond simply being on the road or the waterway to the point where there are victims involved the nature of the crime is one of negligence or recklessness, not one of specific intent. Reckless endangerment, negligent homicide, or vehicular manslaughter would be appropriate charges. Any definition of murder that involves specfic intent is just political grandstanding- if he or she is too drunk to drive or operate a boat, how can the perp actually form "intent"? All these terms of yours suggest the word "accidental", which does not apply. Sorry, Chuck. When a drunk murders a friend of yours, you will think like me, and nothing will sway you. Joe, From what I can tell by your post, the guy never actually went to trial, that was a little bit of grandstanding on your part. From what I can tell from your post, they DA was using the Murder charge (most likely 2nd degree murder) as his leverage in a plea bargain. There have been cases where people have been found guilty of 2nd degree murder, but that charge is not dependent upon intent, it is based upon dangerous conduct with complete disregard for human life. That is completely different than the first degree murder (with premeditated malice intent), that you were stating in your orginal post. I can agree with 2nd degree murder, but your first degree murder case would never fly. If someone said to you TODAY "I have no idea what risks are involved with driving while drunk", and that person was over, say, 21 years of age, what would you say to that person? |
Deadly accident prompts call for engine limitation, age restrictionsfor boaters
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote in message . .. JoeSpareBedroom wrote: "Chuck Gould" wrote in message oups.com... On Oct 30, 12:58?pm, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: "Ernest Scribbler" wrote in message et... "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote Drama? Yes, drama. I can't say what the guy's intentions were when he took 19 year-old Nicole for a ride in his big fast boat, but I wouldn't want to be the prosecutor who tries to prove that killing people was what he had in mind. The DA who did it near here used the tactic so the murderer could only plea bargain for the next worst thing: Maximum sentence for vehicular manslaughter. He put the woman away for something like 22 years. Without the option to charge her with murder, she could've bargained for quite a bit less. The jury did not have a problem with the idea of intent, by the way. You might, but they didn't, according to interviews after the trial. The drunk driver's intent was really just to get home without getting caught. The jury had to be dumb as a box of rocks if they "almost" went for it. Can you picture some guy in a bar getting deliberately loaded so that he'd cause an accident and kill somebody? Drunk driving or boating is a very serious offense. First time offenders should be slapped pretty hard, and repeat offenders should do some serious time.....however, if the offense goes beyond simply being on the road or the waterway to the point where there are victims involved the nature of the crime is one of negligence or recklessness, not one of specific intent. Reckless endangerment, negligent homicide, or vehicular manslaughter would be appropriate charges. Any definition of murder that involves specfic intent is just political grandstanding- if he or she is too drunk to drive or operate a boat, how can the perp actually form "intent"? All these terms of yours suggest the word "accidental", which does not apply. Sorry, Chuck. When a drunk murders a friend of yours, you will think like me, and nothing will sway you. Joe, From what I can tell by your post, the guy never actually went to trial, that was a little bit of grandstanding on your part. From what I can tell from your post, they DA was using the Murder charge (most likely 2nd degree murder) as his leverage in a plea bargain. There have been cases where people have been found guilty of 2nd degree murder, but that charge is not dependent upon intent, it is based upon dangerous conduct with complete disregard for human life. That is completely different than the first degree murder (with premeditated malice intent), that you were stating in your orginal post. I can agree with 2nd degree murder, but your first degree murder case would never fly. If someone said to you TODAY "I have no idea what risks are involved with driving while drunk", and that person was over, say, 21 years of age, what would you say to that person? I would say he was either lying or a fool, but as the DA's all across the country have shown it does not meet the requirement for 1st degree murder. |
Deadly accident prompts call for engine limitation, age restrictions for boaters
On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 23:46:39 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
wrote: I would say he was either lying or a fool, but as the DA's all across the country have shown it does not meet the requirement for 1st degree murder. First degree murder charge can't be justified in cases where a drunk driver kills a pedestrian or another driver/passenger by reason of definition Murder, as opposed to homicide, is defined as the act of killing a person by intentional, purposeful, malicious, premeditated, and/or wanton action. That's the definition. The key is malicious. Deaths that occur by extreme recklessness or during certain serious crimes are considered to be express malice murders. Drunk driving certainly qualifies as an extreme reckless behavior. The hitch is in how First Degree Murder is defined by the state. Most states define it as an unlawful killing that is both willful and premeditated. Second-degree murder is ordinarily defined as an intentional killing that is not premeditated or planned or a killing caused by dangerous conduct and the offender's obvious lack of concern for human life. That's how they can get them on a Second Degree murder charge if t hey choose. But it's easier to plead out to involuntary manslaughter than the expense, time and effort for a Murder in the Second charge. |
Deadly accident prompts call for engine limitation, age restrictionsfor boaters
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 23:46:39 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote: I would say he was either lying or a fool, but as the DA's all across the country have shown it does not meet the requirement for 1st degree murder. First degree murder charge can't be justified in cases where a drunk driver kills a pedestrian or another driver/passenger by reason of definition Murder, as opposed to homicide, is defined as the act of killing a person by intentional, purposeful, malicious, premeditated, and/or wanton action. That's the definition. The key is malicious. Deaths that occur by extreme recklessness or during certain serious crimes are considered to be express malice murders. Drunk driving certainly qualifies as an extreme reckless behavior. The hitch is in how First Degree Murder is defined by the state. Most states define it as an unlawful killing that is both willful and premeditated. Second-degree murder is ordinarily defined as an intentional killing that is not premeditated or planned or a killing caused by dangerous conduct and the offender's obvious lack of concern for human life. That's how they can get them on a Second Degree murder charge if t hey choose. But it's easier to plead out to involuntary manslaughter than the expense, time and effort for a Murder in the Second charge. Which is the point that I was making to Spare, but he preferred to miss the obvious. There have been quiet a few successful prosecutions of 2nd degree murder, and I suspect we will see much more. This will make the plea bargains to involuntary manslaughter seem like a hell of a deal. |
Deadly accident prompts call for engine limitation, age restrictionsfor boaters
John H. wrote:
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 06:36:21 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote: Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 23:46:39 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote: I would say he was either lying or a fool, but as the DA's all across the country have shown it does not meet the requirement for 1st degree murder. First degree murder charge can't be justified in cases where a drunk driver kills a pedestrian or another driver/passenger by reason of definition Murder, as opposed to homicide, is defined as the act of killing a person by intentional, purposeful, malicious, premeditated, and/or wanton action. That's the definition. The key is malicious. Deaths that occur by extreme recklessness or during certain serious crimes are considered to be express malice murders. Drunk driving certainly qualifies as an extreme reckless behavior. The hitch is in how First Degree Murder is defined by the state. Most states define it as an unlawful killing that is both willful and premeditated. Second-degree murder is ordinarily defined as an intentional killing that is not premeditated or planned or a killing caused by dangerous conduct and the offender's obvious lack of concern for human life. That's how they can get them on a Second Degree murder charge if t hey choose. But it's easier to plead out to involuntary manslaughter than the expense, time and effort for a Murder in the Second charge. Which is the point that I was making to Spare, but he preferred to miss the obvious. There have been quiet a few successful prosecutions of 2nd degree murder, and I suspect we will see much more. This will make the plea bargains to involuntary manslaughter seem like a hell of a deal. Hey, did you stay up all night last night? Nope, I slept my normal 5 hrs. |
Deadly accident prompts call for engine limitation, age restrictions for boaters
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
... On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 23:46:39 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote: I would say he was either lying or a fool, but as the DA's all across the country have shown it does not meet the requirement for 1st degree murder. First degree murder charge can't be justified in cases where a drunk driver kills a pedestrian or another driver/passenger by reason of definition Murder, as opposed to homicide, is defined as the act of killing a person by intentional, purposeful, malicious, premeditated, and/or wanton action. That's the definition. The key is malicious. Deaths that occur by extreme recklessness or during certain serious crimes are considered to be express malice murders. Drunk driving certainly qualifies as an extreme reckless behavior. The hitch is in how First Degree Murder is defined by the state. Most states define it as an unlawful killing that is both willful and premeditated. Second-degree murder is ordinarily defined as an intentional killing that is not premeditated or planned or a killing caused by dangerous conduct and the offender's obvious lack of concern for human life. That's how they can get them on a Second Degree murder charge if t hey choose. But it's easier to plead out to involuntary manslaughter than the expense, time and effort for a Murder in the Second charge. I wonder if premeditated is defined as having a specific target, or does "I'm going to kill someone tonight for sure, I just don't know who yet" qualify? |
Deadly accident prompts call for engine limitation, age restrictions for boaters
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 11:50:22 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote: "Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message .. . On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 23:46:39 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote: I would say he was either lying or a fool, but as the DA's all across the country have shown it does not meet the requirement for 1st degree murder. First degree murder charge can't be justified in cases where a drunk driver kills a pedestrian or another driver/passenger by reason of definition Murder, as opposed to homicide, is defined as the act of killing a person by intentional, purposeful, malicious, premeditated, and/or wanton action. That's the definition. The key is malicious. Deaths that occur by extreme recklessness or during certain serious crimes are considered to be express malice murders. Drunk driving certainly qualifies as an extreme reckless behavior. The hitch is in how First Degree Murder is defined by the state. Most states define it as an unlawful killing that is both willful and premeditated. Second-degree murder is ordinarily defined as an intentional killing that is not premeditated or planned or a killing caused by dangerous conduct and the offender's obvious lack of concern for human life. That's how they can get them on a Second Degree murder charge if t hey choose. But it's easier to plead out to involuntary manslaughter than the expense, time and effort for a Murder in the Second charge. I wonder if premeditated is defined as having a specific target, or does "I'm going to kill someone tonight for sure, I just don't know who yet" qualify? Don't know - I'm not a trial lawyer and I don't play one on TV. I'm sure if you could prove that any individual who intended to get drunk and purposly drive into somebody intending to kill them, then you could get a First Degree Murder charge. It would be hard to do though. |
Deadly accident prompts call for engine limitation, age restrictions for boaters
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 06:36:21 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
wrote: Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 23:46:39 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote: I would say he was either lying or a fool, but as the DA's all across the country have shown it does not meet the requirement for 1st degree murder. First degree murder charge can't be justified in cases where a drunk driver kills a pedestrian or another driver/passenger by reason of definition Murder, as opposed to homicide, is defined as the act of killing a person by intentional, purposeful, malicious, premeditated, and/or wanton action. That's the definition. The key is malicious. Deaths that occur by extreme recklessness or during certain serious crimes are considered to be express malice murders. Drunk driving certainly qualifies as an extreme reckless behavior. The hitch is in how First Degree Murder is defined by the state. Most states define it as an unlawful killing that is both willful and premeditated. Second-degree murder is ordinarily defined as an intentional killing that is not premeditated or planned or a killing caused by dangerous conduct and the offender's obvious lack of concern for human life. That's how they can get them on a Second Degree murder charge if t hey choose. But it's easier to plead out to involuntary manslaughter than the expense, time and effort for a Murder in the Second charge. Which is the point that I was making to Spare, but he preferred to miss the obvious. There have been quiet a few successful prosecutions of 2nd degree murder, and I suspect we will see much more. This will make the plea bargains to involuntary manslaughter seem like a hell of a deal. Personally, if you can prove a Murder First charge using a car as a weapon (as happened here in CT a couple of years ago), then it would seem logical to follow through with the same charge for drunk driving. But that's just me. |
Deadly accident prompts call for engine limitation, age restrictionsfor boaters
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 23:46:39 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote: I would say he was either lying or a fool, but as the DA's all across the country have shown it does not meet the requirement for 1st degree murder. First degree murder charge can't be justified in cases where a drunk driver kills a pedestrian or another driver/passenger by reason of definition Murder, as opposed to homicide, is defined as the act of killing a person by intentional, purposeful, malicious, premeditated, and/or wanton action. That's the definition. The key is malicious. Deaths that occur by extreme recklessness or during certain serious crimes are considered to be express malice murders. Drunk driving certainly qualifies as an extreme reckless behavior. The hitch is in how First Degree Murder is defined by the state. Most states define it as an unlawful killing that is both willful and premeditated. Second-degree murder is ordinarily defined as an intentional killing that is not premeditated or planned or a killing caused by dangerous conduct and the offender's obvious lack of concern for human life. That's how they can get them on a Second Degree murder charge if t hey choose. But it's easier to plead out to involuntary manslaughter than the expense, time and effort for a Murder in the Second charge. I wonder if premeditated is defined as having a specific target, or does "I'm going to kill someone tonight for sure, I just don't know who yet" qualify? Fortunately for all of us, the vast majority of people driving over the legal limit, do not have wrecks and do not kill people. The vast majority of DUI's drive dangerously, and somehow get home without an accident, or if we are lucky, get pulled over by the cops. Probably most DUI's have driven many many times drunk, before they are caught or have an accident. It sounds like this is a very personal subject and has touched a raw nerve. Keep pushing for maximum sentences, but 1st degree murder will not be one, until they change the definition or make an exception for DUI's. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:35 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com