toke
|
posted on March 12, 2001 09:50:39 AM new
C'mon, everybody. This is just trolling 101.
|
reamond
|
posted on March 12, 2001 09:51:54 AM new
They ran because their arguments have caused them great pain when applied to someone besides a 12 year old black child.
Their arguments became wholly inconsistent when applied to Laura Bush.
The problem was my arguments were consistent and cogent.
They can't bare to think that Laura Bush be held to the same standards that the 12 year old black child is being held to.
[ edited by reamond on Mar 12, 2001 09:55 AM ]
|
debbielennon
|
posted on March 12, 2001 09:55:05 AM new
reamond:
Did you miss this post from kerryann?
"Tate's case was determined to be heinous enough to be tried in adult court, where his first-degree murder charge was predicated on the felony murder doctrine -- which says you can be held responsible for murder if it happens during the course of a felony. The felony in Tate's case was aggravated child abuse.
The above is from the Salon article."
-------------------------------------------
Under Florida law, it does not matter if there was intent to kill.
*UBB
[ edited by debbielennon on Mar 12, 2001 09:59 AM ]
|
HJW
|
posted on March 12, 2001 09:58:05 AM new
There had been published accounts of the accident, but city officials had declined to release the records because those involved were
under 18.
The speed of Laura Bush's car was illegible on the report. The speed limit for the road was 55.
The police report indicates no charges were filed. That section of the report was left blank.
''As far as we know, no charges were filed,'' said Midland city attorney Keith Stretcher. ''I don't think it's unusual that charges weren't filed.''
Helen
|
reamond
|
posted on March 12, 2001 10:01:58 AM new
debbielennon- Exactly- the felony is the criminal intent.
Not all acts that result in death have the mens rea necessary to rise to murder. The commission of some felonies replaces the mens rea intent. The felony is premeditated and is usually a felony which incurs a high degree of danger of serious bodily injury and death. But the felony can not be the agency itself. For instance, murder is a felony, but does not fall under felony murder. Felony muder came about in response to bank robbers getting manslaughter charges instead of murder charges because the intent was to rob, not kill, and the shooting was an excited response without premeditation. With felony muder, the felony of armed robery replaces the intent.
But not all felonies in which a death results can be charged as murder.
[ edited by reamond on Mar 12, 2001 10:02 AM ]
[ edited by reamond on Mar 12, 2001 10:05 AM ]
|
HJW
|
posted on March 12, 2001 10:03:31 AM new
debbielennon
A prosecutor who will twist the facts in that
manner to justify charging a 12 year old with
murder really defines the word "bastard" to
me.
Helen
|
bunnicula
|
posted on March 12, 2001 10:03:58 AM new
Reamond, if you had brought up the recent case where the son of a TV personality deliberately rammed his SUV into a crowd of fellow college students, then you would have had a decent argument. He's 17 IIRC & I haven't heard how he's being charged yet--the fact that he was on some drug at the time just might get him off of a murder charge.
Instead you troll us with a ridiculous comparison of an accident that occured while the person wasn't paying attention for a moment and the brutal beating death of a child which took concentrated attention and a good bit of time.
|
december3
|
posted on March 12, 2001 10:07:18 AM new
bunnicula,You need to stop making sense, they don't understand it. And please, could you at least try to act stupid. Intelligence has no place in this discussion.
|
jamesoblivion
|
posted on March 12, 2001 10:09:20 AM new
Comparing apples and ovaries is a ridiculous way to make a point.
|
Julesy
|
posted on March 12, 2001 10:10:14 AM new
Tate's case was determined to be heinous enough to be tried in adult court, where his first-degree murder charge was predicated on the felony murder doctrine -- which says you can be held responsible for murder if it happens during the course of a felony. The felony in Tate's case was aggravated child abuse.
Whoa...during sentencing, didn't the judge say that he didn't believe it was felony murder, and that he saw the child abuse/beating death as one act?
|
reamond
|
posted on March 12, 2001 10:11:03 AM new
bunnicula- Again you give evey benefit of doubt and empathy to Laura Bush, but not the 12 year old black child. The facts are Laura Bush was paying attention, if she wasn't it surely would have been in the police report. However, not paying attention does not make KILLING someone an accident. Not paying attention is an intentional act while controling a deadly instrument.
For some odd reason we seem to think Laura Bush could not have committed murder, while this 12 year old black child most surely did.
|
spazmodeus
|
posted on March 12, 2001 10:13:39 AM new
reamond,
Try to keep arguing your point without the Laura Bush example. Kind of falls apart, doesn't it?
By the way, in case you hadn't heard, Michael Skakel, the Kennedy cousin accused of savagely beating 15-year-old Martha Moxley to death with a golf club, will be tried as an adult, according to a judge's verdict about a month ago.
Helen,
I wonder if there are posters among us who would like to tie a rope around this poor kid and drag him behind a pickup truck?
That was so over the top, so thoroughly out of line and offensive, that I think you owe everyone here an apology.
|
reamond
|
posted on March 12, 2001 10:14:26 AM new
december3 must really be feeling the heat now that her arguments don't hold water, at least not in the Bush bucket.
Your own arguments have shown to be baseless, and pointed at a 12 year old. It must give great pain to apply your standards to Laura Bush.
|
jamesoblivion
|
posted on March 12, 2001 10:14:42 AM new
By the way, in case you hadn't heard, Michael Skakel, the Kennedy cousin accused of savagely beating 15-year-old Martha Moxley to death with a golf club, will be tried as an adult, according to a judge's verdict about a month ago.
Details, details.
|
bunnicula
|
posted on March 12, 2001 10:15:43 AM new
December3: Sorry! What was I thinking?!? 
Reamond: the bridge is thataway -->
|
jamesoblivion
|
posted on March 12, 2001 10:16:23 AM new
Reamond, in the same way that apples and ovaries are both red, round objects -- but are unrelated, the Laura Bush car death and the Lionel Tate murd- I mean "accident" bear resemblance only in the fact that a person died.
|
HJW
|
posted on March 12, 2001 10:17:42 AM new
Spaz,
No, I owe nobody an apology. The hostility
here is "over the top". It was only a question.
And, I'll ask another one. How about
execution for this little guy.
Helen
[ edited by HJW on Mar 12, 2001 10:20 AM ]
|
bunnicula
|
posted on March 12, 2001 10:20:32 AM new
HJW: What hostility?!?
|
reamond
|
posted on March 12, 2001 10:20:50 AM new
Spaz- Not using Laura Bush doesn't cause the argument to fall apart at all. Laura Bush is used as an example because everyone recognizes her and there is press on the matter. It also demonstartes our prejudices rather well. I mentioned early on in this thread the example of a car accident resulting in death to demonstrate intent regarding murder- no one paid attention. Mention and apply the stated standards applied to the 12 year old child and apply them to a 17 year old Laura Bush, and we have silence regarding Laura Bush's "murder" from those wishing to hang the 12 year old.
All we hear is that Laura Bush KILLING someone is different, and pure speculation on how it happened, other than the fact that she intentionally ran a stop sign and broke the neck and KILLED another youth. Sounds pretty violent to me, and "not paying" attention is no excuse.
[ edited by reamond on Mar 12, 2001 10:24 AM ]
|
bobbi355
|
posted on March 12, 2001 10:21:58 AM new
I dunno - you asked the question. How 'bout it?
|
HJW
|
posted on March 12, 2001 10:25:38 AM new
bunnicula
I suggest that you read the thread again.
You will find hostility if you read carefully.
Helen
|
december3
|
posted on March 12, 2001 10:26:50 AM new
Heat? Oh, you mean from all the hot air blowing my way. No, we'd have to be speaking in person for that to happen.
|
bunnicula
|
posted on March 12, 2001 10:27:23 AM new
The same "standards" can't & don't apply between an accident and a murder. Which has been repeatedly stated in this thread.
I notice neither you or HJW commented on my post listing white kids who were tried as adults for their murders. Heinous crimes by children, no matter their color, are increasingly being tried in adult courts.
|
december3
|
posted on March 12, 2001 10:31:33 AM new
I don't want y'all to think I'm running away, but I really must get down to my corrupt Florida PO and mail some stuff out.
bunnicula, catch you later.
|
bobbi355
|
posted on March 12, 2001 10:33:25 AM new
Now now bunnicula ....... those don't count! We have to stay focused on this being a RACIST issue. And above all, we must keep sympathizing about this "poor little guy" and let's just not think about all the suffering that little girl must have endured.
|
reamond
|
posted on March 12, 2001 10:35:07 AM new
I did reply regarding those cases- all those cases involved criminal intent. You folks don't seem to grasp how intent is applied to crimes.
The 12 year old's acts were an accident too. There is nothing to show his intent was to kill the girl, anymore than Laura Bush intended to kill who she did.
17 year old Laura Bush knew the law, knew that running a stop sign had a high likelyhood of death or serious injury, and knew or should have known that not paying attention while driving causes death or serious injury, yet she ran the stop sign anyway, broke someone's neck and killed them. Wasn't even charged.
Now we have a 12 year old doing wrestling moves that in all probability he didn't realize the extent of injuries to the girl, and we want blood.
Again, every benefit of doubt to Laura Bush, but the 12 year old black child is a savage cold blooded murderer.
[ edited by reamond on Mar 12, 2001 10:37 AM ]
|
bobbi355
|
posted on March 12, 2001 10:36:43 AM new
No no.....no more blood. There was probably enough of that on the floor.
|
bunnicula
|
posted on March 12, 2001 10:36:59 AM new
HJW: I have seen *nothing* in this thread that warranted the comment quoted above by Spazmodeus. The fact is, we're having a debate. Debates by their nature involve people having opposing viewpoints. No one has been name-calling. No one has been nasty. People have been stating their viewpoints on the matter.
As for the race issue: in fact, it was you & Reamond who brought up race in the first place, so if anyone has been hostile, it has been you.
|
HJW
|
posted on March 12, 2001 10:41:16 AM new
bunnicula,
I don't agree with that and I'm sorry that you feel that way.
Helen
|
reamond
|
posted on March 12, 2001 10:44:35 AM new
Regardless of who brought race up, it has been well demonstrated here that we are unwilling to apply the same standards to the Laura Bush "murder" as we are to the 12 year olds.
I guess the Bush murder was a cleaner kill than the other. Talking to someone or applying make up makes it ok. But wrestling by a 170 lbs 12 year old is a higher degree of disregard for human life.
The cases are very similar in that both lack the intent to kill, which is an element of murder.
|
