Attempted homicide charge withdrawn: (Ok to beat wife to ----)

I read this today and just got so irate that I thought I would share it with you. My interest is that maybe I am over reacting/thinking the story/mess and the good thinking minds here at ATS will help me see things as they should be. Warning-Description of domestic abuse incident in the story.

[Note: The following is the complete news article-due credit to the Lewistown Sential-Lewistown PA. Reporter: By KIERNAN M. SCHALK. It is the only way to get the whole story]. Go ahead, read-I'll wait.

Attempted homicide charge withdrawn

LEWISTOWN - A man charged in connection with beating his wife to the point where she needed surgery, waived a preliminary hearing on Thursday at Magisterial District Judge Jack Miller's office.

Robert L. Laird, 37, had been charged with attempted homicide and other related charges, however, Mifflin County District Attorney Steve Snook withdrew the homicide charge on Thursday, citing a concern that the intent to kill may not have been present when the crime was committed.

Snook said Laird will plead guilty to aggravated assault during a court appearance in the near future and that the charge of aggravated assault carries a serious state sentence, similar to the type of sentence one would receive in an attempted homicide case.

Laird's charges stem from an incident on Dec. 3, 2010 at his residence where he allegedly severely beat his wife Amanda Laird.

According to court documents, the alleged victim's injuries were so severe she had undergone "brain surgery" at Geisinger Medical Center to safe her life.

Laird allegedly beat his wife on and off again, over a period of several hours with a closed fist, hitting her in the head, neck, chest, stomach, knees and thigh, court documents indicate.

Laird is charged with aggravated assault, terroristic threats, simple assault and recklessly endangering another person.

Laird remains incarcerated in the Mifflin County Correctional Facility awaiting a formal arraignment, he is represented by David Dagle.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here is the two things that stick out in my mind that is making me see Red!

District Attorney Steve Snook withdrew the homicide charge on Thursday, citing a concern that the intent to kill may not have been present when the crime was committed.

Laird allegedly beat his wife on and off again, over a period of several hours with a closed fist, hitting her in the head, neck, chest, stomach, knees and thigh

Make that 3 things!

the alleged victim's injuries were so severe she had undergone "brain surgery" at Geisinger Medical Center to safe her life.

What the hell more does the D.A need to go after the most serious charges? Because it's the guys wife-his property-his possession. Explain me that one. And, yes, I have a route to the DA and I will be asking this someday.

Maybe I am wrong. I am not a lawyer so maybe I am missing something but I tell you what... if someone beats me so badly that I need brain surgery to save my life-the bastard better be getting charge with the most serious crimes.

This is what I see as a problem in our Country and it's legal system. No Fear of punishment-harsh type. Do what the hell you want and screw the victims.

And, on that note, I don't see anything in the article about the BEATEN wife agreeing to this choice of action. what a joke.

If there is more to the story, the DA better get it out.

MODS. I put this under Social Issues as I see it being an extremely major one. How Domestic Partners/Wifes/Spouses are treated differently etc.

No I don't think you are wrong or took the article in the wrong context. It doesn't matter if he had intent to kill her or not. He still beat the life out of her and kept on. It wasn't like it was just one time. It was a constant over several hours. How the DA can sit there and change the charge like that is beyond me. It shouldn't matter what his intent was when he was beating her. He beat her to the point where she had to have major surgery. Sounds fishy to me in the reasoning for changing the charge. I bet if someone was to beat the DA like that they sure wouldn't change the charge. It makes me sick to my stomach to know that a person can do this and they want to make the charge less on him.

the bastard better be getting charge with the most serious crimes.

What is better, the guy gets charged with attempted murder, and is acquitted because they can't prove that he had intent to murder, or...he gets charged with assault, and a conviction is in the bag, Since he clearly assaulted her?

I don't in anyway think that the DA is saying it's ok to beat your wife, or anyone fro that matter, but they have to make these tough choices sometimes to get some semblance of justice in our imperfect world.

reply to post by Merigold


I have to agree with you.

More than likely he was charged as he was because a good lawyer could have beat the intent to kill charge, but the assault is given. The man ran a good chance of beating it the other way around and the PA took the sure bet. I didnt see where he said it was ok to beat your wife, either...............he just made a hard call............and this is coming from someone that despises the judicial system.

Having said that

I hope the scumbag gets what he deserves and I am sure he will be experiencing the other side of the coin when he upsets his "Husband" in prison

Merigold is right. Unless the prosecutor can prove that he INTENDED to kill his wife, it's not attempted murder (or homicide). In fact, if he was trying to kill her, he had AMPLE opportunity and could have done so, easily. So that could be used in court to prove that he didn't intend to kill her and that charge would be dropped anyway.

It was the right move. No matter how horrible you think someone's actions are, it's not right OR legally wise to charge them with something more than they've done. Justice is blind. Blind to emotions and emotionally-charged situations. What he did was wrong, but it would be just as wrong to charge him with something he didn't do.

Let them have a solid case of assault, terrorism and reckless endangerment. They'll be sure to get a conviction.

Definitely agree with merigold here. Better to get a guilty plea of the aggravated assault charge than to chance an inability to prove intent to kill.

If they go with 'Aggravated Assault w/extreme indifference to human life' , it's a felony 1 and 20 years.

given that it took place over the course of several hours, and him beating her to the point of requiring brain surgery; that would seem to demonstrate 'extreme indifference to human life' (?)

I hear you but I think this.

Anytime you send hours beating someone around the brain-and other vital organs etc-you intend to kill.

Just because you didn't finish the job doesn't mean one didn't intend to do it.

I feel the same way when a gun is used in a crime. Just because the shooter missed the target or didn't kill with a hit shot doesn't mean he didn't intend to kill.

I say they should be held as equally accountable as if they murdered the person. Take away any "gray" areas.

The simple act that causes the harm is the intent. After that -screw the attackers and thank God the person didn't die etc.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

he had AMPLE opportunity and could have done so, easily. So that could be used in court to prove that he didn't intend to kill her and that charge would be dropped anyway.

I hadn't seen this point you made B.H. A good one at that.

See, that is why I put it up-for some more cooler heads can review etc.

I just see all of this lessening of charges a slippery slope of a downward trend our country is on anyway-IMO.

Thanks for the input-all of you. .