Quote:
Originally Posted by midgetlover  As far as I am concerned anytime a weapon is introduced in the act of a crime then it should be considered premeditated, no if and or buts about it.
he should rot in jail with the others murderers, rapists and child molesters.
he has already admitted firing the weapon "into" the house striking her in head instead of actually admitting he fired the gun "into" to her. IMO its no different and his sentence should already be signed sealed and delivered without trial.
It was obvious from the witness statements that there was no need for him to bring a gun to "scare" Erin. She was already scared of him,so him just showing up would be more that enough for him to "scare" her.
Unless...................he intended to use it which we all know he did do. |
I'm sorry if it seems like I'm being a contrarian here, midgetlover, but I want to make sure people aren't misinterpreting what I posted. There seems to be some sort of sentiment that I think this dude is a good guy or something and we need to give him community service and cable TV. That's not really it at all.
Felony murder is just the shortest route for the prosecution to get from point A to point B which is to prove that he committed murder and to put him away. It doesn't involve any sort of value judgment that it is less bad than premeditated murder or anything. To the contrary, the legislature saw fit to make it exactly the same as premeditated murder, and therefore worthy of the same level of punishment.
While there is a case for the premeditated murder, it is the weaker and harder case to make. Many of the witness statements (particularly of the victim) may not make it into trial. Why try to make the harder case (premeditated), when the easier one (felony murder) yields exactly the same results?