Shooter gets what he deserves after man dies 40 years later

CrazyIvan · 09-04-2007, 01:19 PM

Shouldn't someone serve life if they cause paralysis of someone in the first place???

Man who served time for shooting cop charged again - CNN.com

Johnnycat · 09-04-2007, 01:32 PM

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.

CrazyIvan · 09-04-2007, 01:33 PM

That is what I mean...he should have gotten life in the first place. To charge him twice is wrong.

Johnnycat · 09-04-2007, 01:45 PM

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.

ezearln · 09-04-2007, 01:46 PM

Ahem I believe this is covered by the constituition as in Double Jeapardy, for the same offense.

rondog · 09-04-2007, 01:48 PM

Need to bring back public executions, IMO.

CrazyIvan · 09-04-2007, 02:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ezearln

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...

SKS NOOB · 09-04-2007, 02:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CrazyIvan

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.

CrazyIvan · 09-04-2007, 02:32 PM

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."

ezearln · 09-04-2007, 02:34 PM

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.

Gio · 09-04-2007, 03:07 PM

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.

ezearln · 09-04-2007, 03:37 PM

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.

just_a_car · 09-04-2007, 03:39 PM

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.

Oxford · 09-04-2007, 04:33 PM

It comes down to this. There's legal laws...and then there's moral laws. They both don't necessarily result in the same punishment.

ezearln · 09-04-2007, 04:40 PM

Ox there has been untold grief visited upon humanity in the name of morality and those claiming theirs is right.

Oxford · 09-04-2007, 04:43 PM

...and that goes back even before the Crusader's efforts to exert their moral influence on heathens.

Big Dog · 09-04-2007, 05:21 PM

Any good lawyer worth his degree can get this thrown out. UNLESS it gets political - then all bets are off.

toolman · 09-04-2007, 06:26 PM

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.

ezearln · 09-04-2007, 06:30 PM

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

Chris · 09-04-2007, 06:36 PM

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.

09-04-2007, 01:19 PM	#1
CrazyIvan Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Englewood, CO Posts: 2,369	Shooter gets what he deserves after man dies 40 years later Shouldn't someone serve life if they cause paralysis of someone in the first place??? Man who served time for shooting cop charged again - CNN.com __________________ "Minimum wage, minimum effort." "Never underestimate the power of stupidity." ~Me

09-04-2007, 01:32 PM	#2
Johnnycat Senior Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Tupelo, MS Posts: 247	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. __________________ Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. - Aldous Huxley

09-04-2007, 01:33 PM	#3
CrazyIvan Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Englewood, CO Posts: 2,369	That is what I mean...he should have gotten life in the first place. To charge him twice is wrong. __________________ "Minimum wage, minimum effort." "Never underestimate the power of stupidity." ~Me

09-04-2007, 01:45 PM	#4
Johnnycat Senior Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Tupelo, MS Posts: 247	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. __________________ Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. - Aldous Huxley

09-04-2007, 01:46 PM	#5
ezearln Senior Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Texas Hill Country Posts: 3,175	Ahem I believe this is covered by the constituition as in Double Jeapardy, for the same offense. __________________ "You can have my Freedom when I'm done with it!"

09-04-2007, 01:48 PM	#6
rondog Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Parker, CO Posts: 1,345	Need to bring back public executions, IMO.

09-04-2007, 02:32 PM	#9
CrazyIvan Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Englewood, CO Posts: 2,369	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." __________________ "Minimum wage, minimum effort." "Never underestimate the power of stupidity." ~Me

09-04-2007, 02:34 PM	#10
ezearln Senior Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Texas Hill Country Posts: 3,175	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!"

09-04-2007, 03:07 PM	#11
Gio Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 804 Images: 8	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. __________________ Blow you up.

09-04-2007, 03:37 PM	#12
ezearln Senior Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Texas Hill Country Posts: 3,175	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!"

09-04-2007, 03:39 PM	#13
just_a_car Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Edmonds, WA Posts: 3,525	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. __________________

09-04-2007, 04:33 PM	#14
Oxford Super Moderator Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Gladstone, Missouri Posts: 13,024 Blog Entries: 4	It comes down to this. There's legal laws...and then there's moral laws. They both don't necessarily result in the same punishment. __________________ "If it's worth doing, it's worth doing right".

09-04-2007, 04:40 PM	#15
ezearln Senior Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Texas Hill Country Posts: 3,175	Ox there has been untold grief visited upon humanity in the name of morality and those claiming theirs is right. __________________ "You can have my Freedom when I'm done with it!"

09-04-2007, 04:43 PM	#16
Oxford Super Moderator Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Gladstone, Missouri Posts: 13,024 Blog Entries: 4	...and that goes back even before the Crusader's efforts to exert their moral influence on heathens. __________________ "If it's worth doing, it's worth doing right".

09-04-2007, 05:21 PM	#17
Big Dog Moderator Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Tallahassee, Florida Posts: 10,221	Any good lawyer worth his degree can get this thrown out. UNLESS it gets political - then all bets are off. __________________ Moderator of: AR15/M16, M14/M1A, New/Beginning Shooters and Militaria/Collectables.

09-04-2007, 06:26 PM	#18
toolman Mr. Fixit Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: abilene,tx Posts: 5,582 Blog Entries: 22	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. __________________ Don't be messin' with my gun!

09-04-2007, 06:30 PM	#19
ezearln Senior Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Texas Hill Country Posts: 3,175	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!"

09-04-2007, 06:36 PM	#20
Chris HMFIC Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: North Carolina Posts: 3,834,171 Images: 19 Blog Entries: 18	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. __________________ Rules \| Contributing Members No one has the right to deny my personal safety Please be descriptive in your thread titles!