I have to disagree - this is like double jeapardy. The "suspect" has already served for "attempted murder" - if we now rule it murder, then he couldn't have been charged with attempted murder.
this would open a huge can of worms.
__________________ I reserve the right to be wrong.
Okay - I see what you mean, and that is a completely different issue. I suppose 15 years is a little light for paralyzing an officer during a robbery. THere is so much wrong with our "Justice" system, however, that I wouldn''t even kow where to begin to fix things.
__________________ I reserve the right to be wrong.
Ahem I believe this is covered by the constituition as in Double Jeapardy, for the same offense.
It's kind of a slippery slope. First, he was charged for attempted murder, because the guy did not die. Now he died from the fallout of the initial attack. So, they are charging this guy for murder. It is kinda charging him for the same thing twice, but it is kinda like charging him for 2 different things as well.
I dunno...
__________________
Don't let their ignorance and hate intimidate.
It's kind of a slippery slope. First, he was charged for attempted murder, because the guy did not die. Now he died from the fallout of the initial attack. So, they are charging this guy for murder. It is kinda charging him for the same thing twice, but it is kinda like charging him for 2 different things as well.
I dunno...
.....AND the fact that the officer that was shot died 40 YEARS later!?!??! The D.A. responsible should be muted for life.
You could, however, consider it as in Civil Law. You can only claim future losses in the original case. Once the case is settled, you cannot come back later and add an addendum for additional losses. The judge will tell you: "Shoulda thought about that when you sued the first time."
__________________
Don't let their ignorance and hate intimidate.
I am certain there is far more to this story than just whats comming from this overzealous ADA's mouth. This admitted hairball was originally charged with and indicted for attempted capital murder of a Peace Officer. Tried and convicted on that charge. Now the victim dies 40 years LATER and the ADA thinks the Perp should be charged AGAIN only this time for Murder??? Hogwash. There is more backgroud here, something stinks and the stench is comming from that DA. They will have one heck of a time floating this boat.
__________________ "You can have my Freedom when I'm done with it!"
Attempted murder and murder are different apparently. So as long as that distinction is made, the way they explain it they can do it. Kinda like a drug dealer getting booked for 2nd degree murder for selling a person drugs, then the person overdoses. They guy is a cop killer. He should have been put away for much more than 15 years for the first time though. Maybe life.
Gio, I respect your opinion however some key elements I feel need to be pointed out.
1) The Officer shot did not die as a direct causative result of having been shot.
2) Because of that the Suspect was rightfully Charged, indicted, tried and convicted for "Attempted Murder" (and no 15 years wasn't enough but was perhaps the Maximum possible under the law)
3) Unless there is a DIRECT causative relation between the officers wounding and his death (other than life style, age, genetics, diesease) that goes immediately back to the crime (and I have serious doubts there really are)
Then you do not have a case that will fly in a court of Law. While the Suspect didn't get nearly what he deserved for his actions he was tried and served his time.
Now a possibly overzealous DA looking to build a tough on crime rep comes in and says ain't good enough the Cop died 40 years later time to put you back in the system? This smacks of double jeapardy in the worse possible way.
__________________ "You can have my Freedom when I'm done with it!"
Not that I think either side here is any more right or wrong, but the defendant's lawyer could easily (if he's convicted of murder) have that 15 years he already served subtracted from whatever sentence he was given, since it's essentially for the same crime.
So, say he's given 20 years with chance of parole... that would mean he does 5 more years.
I dunno... I kinda agree with EZ, something doesn't smell right about the whole thing. Not sure if it's the DA or if it's perhaps something about the situation surrounding the crime. Makes me want for some "fair and balanced" reports from 40 years ago.
__________________
B.S. Chemistry UofWA '09
CETME Owners - Founder
AK-47 - Member
The Mosin Men - Member
KF7GEA
Think about it though, if someone is shot and dies a few days later, the perps are charged with murder even though the victim didn't die immediately. Yes this guy lived for 40 more years-paralyzed! What kind of life is that? I think the perp should suffer at least as long as the victim. How do you determine what the time limit is between the shooting and death when it comes to levying murder charges? I'm glad I don't have to figure it out, this could take years.
Point is was the victims death a Direct result of his original injuries and whom will be making that determination AND this Crime has already been prosecuted, the actor tried and sentenced and served his sentence. And I still think the twice in jeapardy rule applies. You cannot try someone twice for the same act, once convicted or acquited
__________________ "You can have my Freedom when I'm done with it!"
He died due to an infection. What if the cop or someone related to him didn't clean the wound properly? It's the creeps fault for shooting him, but he served what society dealt as punishment.
Should have punished him to the max, when you had a chance.
Blow you up.
