Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

"simply firing a gun at somebody . . . is not attempted murder."

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Dear lord.....I cannot believe that. That is indeed outrageous. If I fired any of my guns at someone to can damn well believe it's to kill (if they are trying to rob me). I don't want them coming back for revenge. I hope that Judge gets kicked off the bench. She does NOT deserve to be a Judge. I hope this doesn't count as case law as now every a-hole with a gun within 20 miles of my town will try shooting me "as a reaction to my blue lights"......
    You have the right to remain silent, but apparently you lack the skill to exercise that right.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by tony.o View Post
      If Obama becomes President, she'll probably be considered for a Supreme Court Nomination.

      oh man, I have to agree with that. I normally vote independent on the principle that a two-party system is crap. And if Jesse "the Body" Ventura should ever run, I'll be happy as a pig in... well, you know.

      Comment


      • #18
        I am not suprised at all. Typical judge. Refuses to believe what takes place outside the courtroom.
        Prov 17:17 A friend loveth at all times, and a brother is born for adversity.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by D.o.D cop View Post
          Dear lord.....I cannot believe that. That is indeed outrageous. If I fired any of my guns at someone to can damn well believe it's to kill (if they are trying to rob me). I don't want them coming back for revenge. I hope that Judge gets kicked off the bench. She does NOT deserve to be a Judge. I hope this doesn't count as case law as now every a-hole with a gun within 20 miles of my town will try shooting me "as a reaction to my blue lights"......
          i am almost 100% positive this won't count as case law. if i'm not mistaken it has to go to either the state appellate court or the state supreme court before it becomes case law.

          edit: this ruling is so outragous that the only reason i could fathom her making this ruling is that she is doing this as a favor for somebody she knows. it says right in the article that she grew up in the housing projects . . .
          Last edited by unsworninpa104; 03-26-2008, 12:19 PM.

          Comment


          • #20
            I know that this is not a very popular thought here, but the judge was probably correct. Once again, Attempted Murder is almost impossible to prove. Most crimes are proved by the act, so in shooting or stabbing a person, causing a serious injury, your act alone is proof of your intent to cause that injury, making you guilty of assault. BUT to raise that assault to an Attempted Murder, the prosecutor MUST prove your intent to kill, which is virtually impossible, unless you make an admission.

            Comment


            • #21
              Dino your right and wrong at least out here, actions are words. By pointing a gun at somebody and shooting, the act is so inherintely dangerous that courts have ruled this to be attempted murder. This is not like swinging a bat at somebody. Now the exemption would be if you deliberatly struck a non-vital area, by say placing the gun against a finger on a table and blowing the finger off, that would just be mayhem.
              Today's Quote:

              "The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits."
              Albert Einstein

              Comment


              • #22
                On another note if you look at my avatar you will see a picture of the judge
                Today's Quote:

                "The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits."
                Albert Einstein

                Comment


                • #23
                  Yet again, liberalism at its best.

                  I recently worked a case where two soldiers (brothers) home on leave stepped between their sister and her scumbag drug-dealer boyfriend when said boyfriend was trying to beat her. Long story short, the scumbag boyfriend pulls out a knife and during the scuffle manages to slice the throats of both brothers, right over the artery, almost ear to ear. Only reason they're still alive is the scumbag didn't managed to cut deep enough.

                  My department's response? Charge him with Assault 2 and not attempted murder as the DA's office does not like to see attempted murder cases involving knives.

                  All I can say is WTF?

                  - V

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    MrDep....What makes pointing a firearm at a person more dangerous than stabbing with a knife......in NY the intent element is absolutely crucial to an Attempted Murder charge....of course in a Murder charge, the intent is proved by the death.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Doesn't everyone know that shooting at someone is just something you do to show that you are angry? It's no big deal -- unless you are the police.
                      Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. -- Aldous Huxley
                      Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity. -- Albert Einstein

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Dinosaur32 View Post
                        MrDep....What makes pointing a firearm at a person more dangerous than stabbing with a knife......in NY the intent element is absolutely crucial to an Attempted Murder charge....of course in a Murder charge, the intent is proved by the death.
                        A knife could be attempted murder too, depending on where the blow is aimed. But with a gun the difference is about 800 fps.
                        Today's Quote:

                        "The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits."
                        Albert Einstein

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          When asked why he had shot the officer, he said: "I was going to rob him when he opened the door to the booth. I shot the gun one time and then he closed the door. I then shot two more times while he was inside the booth. I was shooting through the glass, but I don't think the bullets went through. I was just shooting."
                          oh, ok. I see. He used a gun to commit an armed robbery, shot the gun, striking the officer once, by accident, of course...then fired two more times just for the hell of it. After all, he didn't think the bullets went through.

                          Boddy-Johnson said he wanted to rob the officer's laptop and gun so he could "sell it [to pay] restitution for my stolen-car case."
                          So he knew it was an officer, but took a gun anyway. Just for the visual effect, not to actually use it.

                          This ruling, against the police is inexcusable. An absolutely atrocious ruling If I get shot, the perp knew what may happen. He didn't shoot "just for the hell of it". What kind of asinine ruling is this? The stupidity gene is spreading slowly....once ******* at a time...

                          A man should never be ashamed to own that he has been in the wrong, which is but saying... that he is wiser today than yesterday. Jonathan Swift 1667-1745

                          It's only a conspiracy when your party is not in power.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Why should the location of the knife blow count in determing an Attempted Murder charge....but not an errant shot. Isn't getting shot in the arm often less life threatening than a stab or slash in the same location?

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Although (in CA) Assault with a Deadly Weapon is much easier to prove than Assault with Intent to Commit Murder, the case in Philly shows several areas that could have been better covered to result in a finding on the more serious offense.

                              The investigator who conducted the interview could have drawn out more specific information from the suspect as to what he "expected" would have occurred shooting a high powered rifle at someone so close by. He could have asked why the last two shots were fired into the booth, if the door was already closed.

                              The prosecutor could have presented case law (there's lot's of it) showing implied intent in similar situations (not leaving an "out" for the judge).

                              The judge is obviously a POS, who's not qualified to sit on the bench and apparently lacks the integrity to have been appointed in the first place. By the way, how did she get there? (Appointed by the governor?)
                              "I'm not fluent in the language of violence, but I know enough to get around in places where it's spoken."

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Dinosaur32 View Post
                                Why should the location of the knife blow count in determing an Attempted Murder charge....but not an errant shot. Isn't getting shot in the arm often less life threatening than a stab or slash in the same location?
                                Actually, the fact that this scumbag purposely attempted to slit each brother's throat should go a long way to showing what his intent was. As for the location of a bullet wound determining intent, firearms are a little different. Good guys and bad guys are shooting at one of two locations - center mass or head (center mass the vast majority of the time). We do this because in a stressful situation high-markmanship usually goes out the window. Where the bullets actually land is irrelevant. I can't think of any reasonably informed person (the ones who realize people don't actually shoot weapons out of other peoples hands like in the movies) who doesn't realize that intentionally discharging a gun at a person is pretty much something you do to attempt to cause that person's death.

                                But with a knife, I have seen many a fight gone bad where someone pulled a knife to cause injury but may not really have had the intent to outright kill the person. However, intentionally slicing someone's throat from ear to ear pretty much speaks for itself as to what you're trying to do. Anyone believe they can live if their brain is permanently deprived of blood / oxygen? I sure don't lol.

                                Good question though.

                                Comment

                                MR300x250 Tablet

                                Collapse

                                What's Going On

                                Collapse

                                There are currently 6513 users online. 378 members and 6135 guests.

                                Most users ever online was 158,966 at 04:57 AM on 01-16-2021.

                                Welcome Ad

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X