Boy arrested for murder after police shoot and kill his friend.

This is the world we live in:

A teen who was assaulted by a masked man gets fined for defending herself from being raped.

An ex-marine and patriot gets raided by SWAT and is shot 60 times and killed when he's in bed and when he didn't even have a gun or fire a gun.

An armed robber is charged for murder as a thief when a cop kills his accomplice in self-defense where a murder of any kind didn't even take place.

Originally posted by calstorm
Wow, a lot of high and mighty people on here. With the economy going down the drain, a lot of people are going to be turning to theft to feed their families. I don't know if that's the case here, but what if it is?

Agreed. This kid signed up to the robbery because it was the best decision he could make in the eyes of his young mind. He didn't murder his friend, so why charge him for that and not just the robbery?

I would hope the blame is not all just being shifted to the child "murderer" with the cop escaping a thorough investigation as to whether deadly force was necessary.

reply to post by arbitrarygeneraiist


All of which took place in different states.... whcih all have differing laws...

funny how that is left out.. In addition to the fact the swat officer is under ivnestigation now.

Like many mentioned this is the infamous felony murder doctrine in action. If anyone dies during an individual's commission of a felony crime, their death can be attributed to the individual as a count of murder in the first degree. Even something like a heart attack could be prosecuted against the individual as though it were a premeditated act of violence. At juvenile ages like 15 and 16 I personally don't think that it should be enforced but it happens regardless. Many prosecutors will throw that in a young person's face as a tactic to report on criminal activities of others in the area and take it "into account" if the individual cooperates. It's a sick system we have.

reply to post by Xcathdra


Funny how I mentioned the world. I didn't realize that the entire world was restricted to one specific part of... the world.

And for the record, one even occurred in a different country. The UK isn't a state. I was being sarcastic and attempting to exaggerate some of the inane news stories that occur in various places.

reply to post by arbitrarygeneraiist


well.. at least you got the exxageration part correct....

reply to post by Xcathdra


Did I leave out something else?

reply to post by arbitrarygeneraiist


Nope.. you got it man.. You were exaggerating in your post, and I didnt take it as such.

no worries.. were on the same page now.

Originally posted by MJZoo
he was charged with murder because someone died during a CRIME being committed, that he was involved in.

Who did he murder?

Did the cops see it?

either read and understand the situation or sit in the corner with your dunce cap on.

RIIIGGGHHHTTT...

Originally posted by badw0lf

Originally posted by MJZoo
he was charged with murder because someone died during a CRIME being committed, that he was involved in.

Who did he murder?

Did the cops see it?

either read and understand the situation or sit in the corner with your dunce cap on.

RIIIGGGHHHTTT...

Hahaha

Try and make those statements in court. See how far you would get.

Originally posted by blackrain17
Bad seed anyway, too bad this idiot is gonna cost the tax payers...

. I really dnt care about the law and order in this country! Our government is the biggest dope boys around and the feds/police is baddest gang period!

Regardless of whether or not the kid committed a crime and put himself in that situation, if he didn't pull the trigger, he's not guilty of murder; murder is intentionally killing someone. In this situation, someone died as a direct result of his actions, but he didn't purposefully kill them. The proper charge, then, is manslaughter.

Originally posted by Kaiju
I think it is great that we have laws like these that help sweep away the garbage.
Zero symathy. Zero pity.
I do have sympathy and pity for the everyday Joe who gets up and goes to work for his money.
These scumbags are just another example of people who don't pull their own weight in society and as long as we keep the number of leeches high, our way of life will continue to deteriorate.

Does that apply for these in Wall street?

Originally posted by newcovenant
reply to post by purplemer

 

It is a travesty of justice but in their minds the young man would be alive were it not for their combined actions and so their decision to commit the crime was what got the one guy shot and so the survivor is responsible for the murder or death. It is an unwarranted and preposterous stretch of the circumstances and a convenient way to absolve oneself of guilt for shooting a child. By this reasoning anyone shot by police during a robbery could also be changed with shooting themselves.

Perhaps if the gas station had better security measures it also would not have happened. By your logic, the gas station owner is therefore also a murderer. Or if the teens mother would not have had the baby who became a robber, it wouldn't have happened. So the teens mother is guilty of murder too. These what-if scenarios you rest the case on are ridiculous.

If someone in the robbery died, whoever pulled the trigger is responsible for that. The way you hand off responsibility in such a round-about manner is in violation of common sense. Murder is when one person kills another one on purpose and without just cause. So, unless the teen killed someone without cause, he isn't a murderer. I think he's in enough trouble as it is for armed robbery.

There wasn't even a murder that took place that day. It was one person killing another in self defense. Killing in self defense is not murder. So without a murder taking place, there is nobody to charge for murder!

reply to post by star in a jar


Definitely, though white collar crime would be extremely hard to convict.

Pointing fingers at someone might get the process under way. lol.

reply to post by nahsik


What statements?

I'm asking those arguing for his charge of murder, to tell who he shot.

Simple enough.

Originally posted by MJZoo
[color=E66C2C]It's not really that hard to understand if you have any knowledge of laws, whatsoever. This is NOT a new law. It's not even a charge that is only used once in a blue moon. The kid would also have been charged with murder if his friend would have shot and killed the people they robbed. Either way, one of them is dead and hopefully the other one is locked up for a long time. Sounds like a pretty good outcome to me.

You are correct, it is not hard to understand at all.

What is hard to understand is how you, and so many others within this thread, continue to overlook important details such as- An autopsy Thursday found he died from a gunshot wound to the [color=E66C2C]back.

That does not even include the enormous amounts of [color=E66C2C]Guilty!! (no possibility of innocence) that continues to spew from ignorant minds within this thread.

"GUILTY! The Cop was right!!! blah blah blah..................."

Originally posted by capod2t
Many posts here are right on target. This is far from a new law and has been pretty widely accepted.

By who? Survey 10 random people and see how widely known this law is that nobody knows about except three people including yourself, since you're completely wrong!

Originally posted by purplemer
This is really messed up. The two lads commit a robbery and when confronted by police one of them pulls a gun and is shot. Now his friend who never pulled a gun has been arrested for murder.
for murder when the police pulled the trigger.

As far as I know - - this is quite common.

If you commit a crime - - you are responsible for anything that happens during that crime.

reply to post by purplemer


I agree with the police.
If the boys were not stupid they would probably both still be alive.
I think it really is that simple.