Tahah being charged with 1st Degree murder!

[banyon]

Originally Posted by Tee

One would think that "unlawful discharge of a firearm" occurs in every shooting-homocide, since the gun is unlawfully fired a fraction of a second before the bullet actually contacts the victim.

If you are charging the guy with premeditated murder, you don't need to worry about connecting it with an unlawful felony. The murder is felonious itself. Felony murder is used when someone did something inherently dangerous, but may have lacked the intentional mental state needed to prove premeditated murder.

The classic case of felony murder is a bank robbery. If you decide to rob a bank and a couple of people happen to die in the process, then you probably didn't have a premeditated plan to kill those people, you just wanted the money. You probably would've preferred if people hadn't died, it was just bad luck. However, you were comitting inherently dangerous acts (the bank robbin') that are often likely (and foreseeable) to result in deaths. Society views these acts (and unlawful discharge at an occupied dwelling) as so dangerous that they should also carry the same penalty as regular premeditated murder. Firing off rounds at an occupied dwelling is like this.

However, you could also imagine cases of homicides where it wouldn't involve an unlawful discharge of a firearm at all. What if a homeowner believes that anintruder has broken into their home, they think they see something and they shoot, but it turns out to be their teenage sneaking back into the house after sneaking out. They would not be charged with felony murder. Same wth a huntng accident, etc.

Normally you can show the intent to kill the shootee, so felony murder is the rarer case.

[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.

[banyon]

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?

[midgetlover]

Well Banyon i did at first but then i took my time and reread the posts and can see the clarification you were making about the differences in the charges and how they are charged.

He brought a gun to the scene of the crime he intended to commit and I do not believe that there should be a trial or any of this should be in question on whether it was "premeditated" or not.

But we dont write the laws and we dont enforce the laws. We are either beneficial to the laws or victims of the law or like alot of people are innocent by standers to the laws.

The victim will be lost in the shuffle and the trial will ultimately be whether he showed intention or not. As sad as it may be it the truth.

We can print all the laws how they are written and what they mean but that doesnt mean anything to the ones who the crime was commited against. Tahah gets to to continue living and Erin remains dead and no amount of justice brings her back or excuses the fact that someone was taken from their loved ones prematurely because a grown man who was put on a pedestal in our communtity to uphold the laws went on to break the laws he was hired to enforce and prevent because he was to immature to handle a simple break up.

As unfair as that is, the law as it is written could either save nor prevent what happened to her.

[tat2me82]

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.

[Bubba]

What if the crime is being committed AGAINST ME, and I introduce my weapon to put a stop to it?

[midgetlover]

By any means necessary are you allowed to stop a crime from being commited against you or another person if you feel that your use of force can be justified and you feel your life or theirs is in danger

[Bubba]

Thanks, just wanted to clarify your definition of premeditated. Just because I carry a weapon and may use it in a crime commited against me, or somebody close to me, I wouldn't want that to be included of your premeditated use of a weapon during a crime definition.

[Highwayman]

Originally Posted by Bubba

What if the crime is being committed AGAINST ME, and I introduce my weapon to put a stop to it?

If it goes to trial you hope that I’m on the jury.

[midgetlover]

Committing a crime with a weapon and having to use a weapon to defend yourself in the act of a crime is different.

Im all for the use of weapon to stop criminals from committing crimes against other people. Whether you are using it to stop a crime or one being committed against you.

I would love to be on any jury when a victim had to defend themselves with the use of a weapon. we should all have a right to defend ourselves by any means necessary.