You fags are talking about "felony murder," i.e., when you're engaged in the commission of a felony and somebody dies, they bump it up and bootstrap it into a murder charge. Intent is not required for the murder charge because it's bootstrapped within the commission of the felony and if somebody dies, you're fucked.
Fine. I'll give your "unintentional murder" charge its due, but intent is not absent, it lies within the lesser felony offense, which they then inflate to murder.
And since you're so interested, and angry @dflea, you should definitely be aware of this next time you visit MN:
609.223 ASSAULT IN THE THIRD DEGREE. Subdivision 1.Substantial bodily harm. Whoever assaults another and inflicts substantial bodily harm may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than five years or to payment of a fine of not more than $10,000, or both.
So if you kick a guy's ass at your next bar brawl, and he dies, you too could be a murderer. Pretty chickenshit maneuver, but it worked for the MN prosecutor, and if it stands, you'll see it here, too.
But since I have balls, I invite you gay chums to have as much fun as you like at my expense, here and now, for not paying attention to the Chauvin trial. I deserve it. And God knows I've earned it spanking your faggy asses around for years. Enjoy. Faggots.
You fags are talking about "felony murder," i.e., when you're engaged in the commission of a felony and somebody dies, they bump it up and bootstrap it into a murder charge. Intent is not required for the murder charge because it's bootstrapped within the commission of the felony and if somebody dies, you're fucked.
Fine. I'll give your "unintentional murder" charge its due, but intent is not absent, it lies within the lesser felony offense, which they then inflate to murder.
And since you're so interested, and angry @dflea, you should definitely be aware of this next time you visit MN:
609.223 ASSAULT IN THE THIRD DEGREE. Subdivision 1.Substantial bodily harm. Whoever assaults another and inflicts substantial bodily harm may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than five years or to payment of a fine of not more than $10,000, or both.
So if you kick a guy's ass at your next bar brawl, and he dies, you too could be a murderer. Pretty chickenshit maneuver, but it worked for the MN prosecutor, and if it stands, you'll see it here, too.
But since I have balls, I invite you gay chums to have as much fun as you like at my expense, here and now, for not paying attention to the Chauvin trial. I deserve it. And God knows I've earned it spanking your faggy asses around for years. Enjoy. Faggots.
That's a lot of words to say you're a fucking idiot that was talking out your ass. I see your DuckDuckGo search got you all up to speed on Minnesota's various levels of assault, though.
Not surprised. This decision didn't really matter, other than the rioting, because it's going to be appealed so LIPO. The guy wasn't going to get a fair trial. There is no way anyone can convince me he intended to kill Floyd.
Intention to kill is not required for 2nd degree murder.
Then how is it a murder?
You don't know what you're talking about.
That's the law. Pretty cut and dry shit. Unless you're a fucking idiot.
How does my ass taste?
Not flea or gatorz but I always assume your ass tastes like a combination of shit, SFGbob's dick, and whatever flavor lube you two use when you go at each other.
I'll leave you @dflea, @GreenRiverGatorz and @HairyBallsDawg "the faggot trio" to frantically google "Minnesota Second Degree Murder" while jerking each other off.
As far as I'm concerned, we're done here, flyweights.
Enjoy eating my shit.
Foster Law School graduate heard from claiming other people are doing what he just fucking did.
Foster is the Business School.
But, of course, how would you know that?
lmao
What a fucking clown you are. I know what Foster is, you fucking retard. I',m mocking you for thinking you're a lawyer.
Pull your head out of your ass, pay attention to Subdivision 2, retard. And then go fuck yourself:
609.19 MURDER IN THE SECOND DEGREE. Subdivision 1.Intentional murder; drive-by shootings. Whoever does either of the following is guilty of murder in the second degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 40 years: (1) causes the death of a human being with intent to effect the death of that person or another, but without premeditation; or
(2) causes the death of a human being while committing or attempting to commit a drive-by shooting in violation of section 609.66, subdivision 1e, under circumstances other than those described in section 609.185, paragraph (a), clause (3).
§Subd. 2.Unintentional murders. Whoever does either of the following is guilty of unintentional murder in the second degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 40 years: (1) causes the death of a human being, without intent to effect the death of any person, while committing or attempting to commit a felony offense other than criminal sexual conduct in the first or second degree with force or violence or a drive-by shooting; or
(2) causes the death of a human being without intent to effect the death of any person, while intentionally inflicting or attempting to inflict bodily harm upon the victim, when the perpetrator is restrained under an order for protection and the victim is a person designated to receive protection under the order. As used in this clause, "order for protection" includes an order for protection issued under chapter 518B; a harassment restraining order issued under section 609.748; a court order setting conditions of pretrial release or conditions of a criminal sentence or juvenile court disposition; a restraining order issued in a marriage dissolution action; and any order issued by a court of another state or of the United States that is similar to any of these orders.
So clearly the bolded is what Chauvin was being tried for under this provision
This again is where I really do wonder about the concept of reasonable doubt and whether the order was satisfied.
To convict on this, I think you'd have to show that Chauvin was acting in a manner inconsistent with his training. My understanding from listening to the news today prior to the verdict was that the defense made a fairly significant attempt to tie his actions with his training. If the actions were consistent with his training, then I think it's hard to say he "intentionally inflicted or attempted to inflict bodily harm" part of the provision. Maybe you argue the duration and the words of Floyd as crossing the line. I could see it going either way on that one.
I do find it interesting that the penalty of up to 40 years is the same whether intentional or unintentional ... that just seems strange to me. Unintentional to me just screams manslaughter. And while I'm sure that there are reasons for it, getting multiple murder degree convictions AND a manslaughter conviction on the same singular event seems like piling on.
It's actually classic bootstrapping to elevate the charges and penalties. It's not completely accurate to say "intent is not required" for a 2nd degree charge. It is required, but for the underlying felony offense, which in this case was 3rd degree assault, but not the intent to kill. This allows prosecutors to charge people with murder when it's not really a 1st or 2nd degree murder, but somebody falls down the stairs and breaks their neck while you're robbing their safe in their study. Too bad, chump. You're facing a murder charge.
I don't care the @dflea gang chews this bone all week or not. They can have their fun. The only part of the trial I paid any attention to was the verdict today, which I accurately predicted, but which made no mention of the underlying 3rd degree assault offense. And the problem I have with that theory and statute is how many times people are charged with a felony they had no idea or intent to commit, which I believe occurred in the Chauvin case. I.e., if Floyd lived, there'd be no assault charge, but because he died, grievous bodily harm is obvious and up pops the 3rd degree assault charge which then pops again into Murder 2. Is that what we want our cops thinking about on patrol?
Not surprised. This decision didn't really matter, other than the rioting, because it's going to be appealed so LIPO. The guy wasn't going to get a fair trial. There is no way anyone can convince me he intended to kill Floyd.
Intention to kill is not required for 2nd degree murder.
Then how is it a murder?
You don't know what you're talking about.
That's the law. Pretty cut and dry shit. Unless you're a fucking idiot.
How does my ass taste?
Not flea or gatorz but I always assume your ass tastes like a combination of shit, SFGbob's dick, and whatever flavor lube you two use when you go at each other.
I'll leave you @dflea, @GreenRiverGatorz and @HairyBallsDawg "the faggot trio" to frantically google "Minnesota Second Degree Murder" while jerking each other off.
As far as I'm concerned, we're done here, flyweights.
Enjoy eating my shit.
Foster Law School graduate heard from claiming other people are doing what he just fucking did.
Foster is the Business School.
But, of course, how would you know that?
lmao
What a fucking clown you are. I know what Foster is, you fucking retard. I',m mocking you for thinking you're a lawyer.
Pull your head out of your ass, pay attention to Subdivision 2, retard. And then go fuck yourself:
609.19 MURDER IN THE SECOND DEGREE. Subdivision 1.Intentional murder; drive-by shootings. Whoever does either of the following is guilty of murder in the second degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 40 years: (1) causes the death of a human being with intent to effect the death of that person or another, but without premeditation; or
(2) causes the death of a human being while committing or attempting to commit a drive-by shooting in violation of section 609.66, subdivision 1e, under circumstances other than those described in section 609.185, paragraph (a), clause (3).
§Subd. 2.Unintentional murders. Whoever does either of the following is guilty of unintentional murder in the second degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 40 years: (1) causes the death of a human being, without intent to effect the death of any person, while committing or attempting to commit a felony offense other than criminal sexual conduct in the first or second degree with force or violence or a drive-by shooting; or
(2) causes the death of a human being without intent to effect the death of any person, while intentionally inflicting or attempting to inflict bodily harm upon the victim, when the perpetrator is restrained under an order for protection and the victim is a person designated to receive protection under the order. As used in this clause, "order for protection" includes an order for protection issued under chapter 518B; a harassment restraining order issued under section 609.748; a court order setting conditions of pretrial release or conditions of a criminal sentence or juvenile court disposition; a restraining order issued in a marriage dissolution action; and any order issued by a court of another state or of the United States that is similar to any of these orders.
So clearly the bolded is what Chauvin was being tried for under this provision
This again is where I really do wonder about the concept of reasonable doubt and whether the order was satisfied.
To convict on this, I think you'd have to show that Chauvin was acting in a manner inconsistent with his training. My understanding from listening to the news today prior to the verdict was that the defense made a fairly significant attempt to tie his actions with his training. If the actions were consistent with his training, then I think it's hard to say he "intentionally inflicted or attempted to inflict bodily harm" part of the provision. Maybe you argue the duration and the words of Floyd as crossing the line. I could see it going either way on that one.
I do find it interesting that the penalty of up to 40 years is the same whether intentional or unintentional ... that just seems strange to me. Unintentional to me just screams manslaughter. And while I'm sure that there are reasons for it, getting multiple murder degree convictions AND a manslaughter conviction on the same singular event seems like piling on.
It's actually classic bootstrapping to elevate the charges and penalties. It's not completely accurate to say "intent is not required" for a 2nd degree charge. It is required, but for the underlying felony offense, which in this case was 3rd degree assault, but not the intent to kill. This allows prosecutors to charge people with murder when it's not really a 1st or 2nd degree murder, but somebody falls down the stairs and breaks their neck while you're robbing their safe in their study. Too bad, chump. You're facing a murder charge.
I don't care the @dflea gang chews this bone all week or not. They can have their fun. The only part of the trial I paid any attention to was the verdict today, which I accurately predicted, but which made no mention of the underlying 3rd degree assault offense. And the problem I have with that theory and statute is how many times people are charged with a felony they had no idea or intent to commit, which I believe occurred in the Chauvin case. I.e., if Floyd lived, there'd be no assault charge, but because he died, grievous bodily harm is obvious and up pops the 3rd degree assault charge which then pops again into Murder 2. Is that what we want our cops thinking about on patrol?
And that completely makes sense
To me, to bootstrap the charge up you have to first convict the individual of the 3rd degree assault to make the murder charge therefore relevant. But like you said, no real mention of that.
I guess you could get a conviction of the 3rd degree assault charge but the law as you presented looks fairly vague to me (likely with reason).
The more I think about this the more I begin to lean to the facts not really mattering in this case because it was always going to be convict to the max and then go to appeal. Anything less would have been a disaster. I don't look forward to what comes of the appeals.
Not surprised. This decision didn't really matter, other than the rioting, because it's going to be appealed so LIPO. The guy wasn't going to get a fair trial. There is no way anyone can convince me he intended to kill Floyd.
Intention to kill is not required for 2nd degree murder.
Then how is it a murder?
You don't know what you're talking about.
That's the law. Pretty cut and dry shit. Unless you're a fucking idiot.
How does my ass taste?
Not flea or gatorz but I always assume your ass tastes like a combination of shit, SFGbob's dick, and whatever flavor lube you two use when you go at each other.
I'll leave you @dflea, @GreenRiverGatorz and @HairyBallsDawg "the faggot trio" to frantically google "Minnesota Second Degree Murder" while jerking each other off.
As far as I'm concerned, we're done here, flyweights.
Enjoy eating my shit.
Foster Law School graduate heard from claiming other people are doing what he just fucking did.
Foster is the Business School.
But, of course, how would you know that?
lmao
What a fucking clown you are. I know what Foster is, you fucking retard. I',m mocking you for thinking you're a lawyer.
Pull your head out of your ass, pay attention to Subdivision 2, retard. And then go fuck yourself:
609.19 MURDER IN THE SECOND DEGREE. Subdivision 1.Intentional murder; drive-by shootings. Whoever does either of the following is guilty of murder in the second degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 40 years: (1) causes the death of a human being with intent to effect the death of that person or another, but without premeditation; or
(2) causes the death of a human being while committing or attempting to commit a drive-by shooting in violation of section 609.66, subdivision 1e, under circumstances other than those described in section 609.185, paragraph (a), clause (3).
§Subd. 2.Unintentional murders. Whoever does either of the following is guilty of unintentional murder in the second degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 40 years: (1) causes the death of a human being, without intent to effect the death of any person, while committing or attempting to commit a felony offense other than criminal sexual conduct in the first or second degree with force or violence or a drive-by shooting; or
(2) causes the death of a human being without intent to effect the death of any person, while intentionally inflicting or attempting to inflict bodily harm upon the victim, when the perpetrator is restrained under an order for protection and the victim is a person designated to receive protection under the order. As used in this clause, "order for protection" includes an order for protection issued under chapter 518B; a harassment restraining order issued under section 609.748; a court order setting conditions of pretrial release or conditions of a criminal sentence or juvenile court disposition; a restraining order issued in a marriage dissolution action; and any order issued by a court of another state or of the United States that is similar to any of these orders.
So clearly the bolded is what Chauvin was being tried for under this provision
This again is where I really do wonder about the concept of reasonable doubt and whether the order was satisfied.
To convict on this, I think you'd have to show that Chauvin was acting in a manner inconsistent with his training. My understanding from listening to the news today prior to the verdict was that the defense made a fairly significant attempt to tie his actions with his training. If the actions were consistent with his training, then I think it's hard to say he "intentionally inflicted or attempted to inflict bodily harm" part of the provision. Maybe you argue the duration and the words of Floyd as crossing the line. I could see it going either way on that one.
I do find it interesting that the penalty of up to 40 years is the same whether intentional or unintentional ... that just seems strange to me. Unintentional to me just screams manslaughter. And while I'm sure that there are reasons for it, getting multiple murder degree convictions AND a manslaughter conviction on the same singular event seems like piling on.
They were trained that way. Whether Chauvin used it excessively is something above my pay grade.
Spoke with a Defense attorney buddy of mine today. He was surprised at the short deliberation, saying that usually means an acquittal where the jury feels a prosecutor didn't meet their burden. He feels they sat down, read the jury instructions, had lunch, then voted. Deliberation? "How would they have had the time? That fucker has 'multiple appeals' written all over it."
I don't understand why Chauvin's attorney spent so much time on alternative causes of death. No way in hell he was ever getting around the "knee to the neck" causation problem, so WTF? Might have looked good in a diagram, but everyone knows the knee is what killed the guy, so go for the "nobody ever told him that could kill a guy" defense, especially since it was a prescribed restraint method in the training manual. Concede that the knee killed him, claim it was accidental, and beg the jury for forgiveness. Otherwise, you're fucking with a murder conviction in prison. Bad outcome is all but guaranteed.
You fags are talking about "felony murder," i.e., when you're engaged in the commission of a felony and somebody dies, they bump it up and bootstrap it into a murder charge. Intent is not required for the murder charge because it's bootstrapped within the commission of the felony and if somebody dies, you're fucked.
Fine. I'll give your "unintentional murder" charge its due, but intent is not absent, it lies within the lesser felony offense, which they then inflate to murder.
And since you're so interested, and angry @dflea, you should definitely be aware of this next time you visit MN:
609.223 ASSAULT IN THE THIRD DEGREE. Subdivision 1.Substantial bodily harm. Whoever assaults another and inflicts substantial bodily harm may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than five years or to payment of a fine of not more than $10,000, or both.
So if you kick a guy's ass at your next bar brawl, and he dies, you too could be a murderer. Pretty chickenshit maneuver, but it worked for the MN prosecutor, and if it stands, you'll see it here, too.
But since I have balls, I invite you gay chums to have as much fun as you like at my expense, here and now, for not paying attention to the Chauvin trial. I deserve it. And God knows I've earned it spanking your faggy asses around for years. Enjoy. Faggots.
I can tell it was painful for you to write this mea culpa, but apology accepted. Trying reading a single article next time before barreling in head-first into a topic. The bar for conversation here is low, yet you still didn't meet it.
Not surprised. This decision didn't really matter, other than the rioting, because it's going to be appealed so LIPO. The guy wasn't going to get a fair trial. There is no way anyone can convince me he intended to kill Floyd.
Intention to kill is not required for 2nd degree murder.
Then how is it a murder?
You don't know what you're talking about.
That's the law. Pretty cut and dry shit. Unless you're a fucking idiot.
How does my ass taste?
Not flea or gatorz but I always assume your ass tastes like a combination of shit, SFGbob's dick, and whatever flavor lube you two use when you go at each other.
Trying to be funny by stating you always wonder how someone's ass tastes makes me wonder why you would ever denigrate another's IQ...go on with your Master Chef analysis of ass.
Not surprised. This decision didn't really matter, other than the rioting, because it's going to be appealed so LIPO. The guy wasn't going to get a fair trial. There is no way anyone can convince me he intended to kill Floyd.
Intention to kill is not required for 2nd degree murder.
Then how is it a murder?
You don't know what you're talking about.
That's the law. Pretty cut and dry shit. Unless you're a fucking idiot.
How does my ass taste?
Not flea or gatorz but I always assume your ass tastes like a combination of shit, SFGbob's dick, and whatever flavor lube you two use when you go at each other.
I'll leave you @dflea, @GreenRiverGatorz and @HairyBallsDawg "the faggot trio" to frantically google "Minnesota Second Degree Murder" while jerking each other off.
As far as I'm concerned, we're done here, flyweights.
Enjoy eating my shit.
Foster Law School graduate heard from claiming other people are doing what he just fucking did.
Foster is the Business School.
But, of course, how would you know that?
lmao
What a fucking clown you are. I know what Foster is, you fucking retard. I',m mocking you for thinking you're a lawyer.
Pull your head out of your ass, pay attention to Subdivision 2, retard. And then go fuck yourself:
609.19 MURDER IN THE SECOND DEGREE. Subdivision 1.Intentional murder; drive-by shootings. Whoever does either of the following is guilty of murder in the second degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 40 years: (1) causes the death of a human being with intent to effect the death of that person or another, but without premeditation; or
(2) causes the death of a human being while committing or attempting to commit a drive-by shooting in violation of section 609.66, subdivision 1e, under circumstances other than those described in section 609.185, paragraph (a), clause (3).
§Subd. 2.Unintentional murders. Whoever does either of the following is guilty of unintentional murder in the second degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 40 years: (1) causes the death of a human being, without intent to effect the death of any person, while committing or attempting to commit a felony offense other than criminal sexual conduct in the first or second degree with force or violence or a drive-by shooting; or
(2) causes the death of a human being without intent to effect the death of any person, while intentionally inflicting or attempting to inflict bodily harm upon the victim, when the perpetrator is restrained under an order for protection and the victim is a person designated to receive protection under the order. As used in this clause, "order for protection" includes an order for protection issued under chapter 518B; a harassment restraining order issued under section 609.748; a court order setting conditions of pretrial release or conditions of a criminal sentence or juvenile court disposition; a restraining order issued in a marriage dissolution action; and any order issued by a court of another state or of the United States that is similar to any of these orders.
So clearly the bolded is what Chauvin was being tried for under this provision
This again is where I really do wonder about the concept of reasonable doubt and whether the order was satisfied.
To convict on this, I think you'd have to show that Chauvin was acting in a manner inconsistent with his training. My understanding from listening to the news today prior to the verdict was that the defense made a fairly significant attempt to tie his actions with his training. If the actions were consistent with his training, then I think it's hard to say he "intentionally inflicted or attempted to inflict bodily harm" part of the provision. Maybe you argue the duration and the words of Floyd as crossing the line. I could see it going either way on that one.
I do find it interesting that the penalty of up to 40 years is the same whether intentional or unintentional ... that just seems strange to me. Unintentional to me just screams manslaughter. And while I'm sure that there are reasons for it, getting multiple murder degree convictions AND a manslaughter conviction on the same singular event seems like piling on.
It's actually classic bootstrapping to elevate the charges and penalties. It's not completely accurate to say "intent is not required" for a 2nd degree charge. It is required, but for the underlying felony offense, which in this case was 3rd degree assault, but not the intent to kill. This allows prosecutors to charge people with murder when it's not really a 1st or 2nd degree murder, but somebody falls down the stairs and breaks their neck while you're robbing their safe in their study. Too bad, chump. You're facing a murder charge.
I don't care the @dflea gang chews this bone all week or not. They can have their fun. The only part of the trial I paid any attention to was the verdict today, which I accurately predicted, but which made no mention of the underlying 3rd degree assault offense. And the problem I have with that theory and statute is how many times people are charged with a felony they had no idea or intent to commit, which I believe occurred in the Chauvin case. I.e., if Floyd lived, there'd be no assault charge, but because he died, grievous bodily harm is obvious and up pops the 3rd degree assault charge which then pops again into Murder 2. Is that what we want our cops thinking about on patrol?
You didn't pay attention, but shot off your mouth as if you did.
Shocking, really.
Nobody cares what you believe, dipshit. There was a jury. You're just making excuses for talking out your ass.
Hey - did you know Foster is the business school at UW and not the law school?
Not surprised. This decision didn't really matter, other than the rioting, because it's going to be appealed so LIPO. The guy wasn't going to get a fair trial. There is no way anyone can convince me he intended to kill Floyd.
Intention to kill is not required for 2nd degree murder.
Then how is it a murder?
You don't know what you're talking about.
That's the law. Pretty cut and dry shit. Unless you're a fucking idiot.
How does my ass taste?
Not flea or gatorz but I always assume your ass tastes like a combination of shit, SFGbob's dick, and whatever flavor lube you two use when you go at each other.
I'll leave you @dflea, @GreenRiverGatorz and @HairyBallsDawg "the faggot trio" to frantically google "Minnesota Second Degree Murder" while jerking each other off.
As far as I'm concerned, we're done here, flyweights.
Enjoy eating my shit.
Foster Law School graduate heard from claiming other people are doing what he just fucking did.
Foster is the Business School.
But, of course, how would you know that?
lmao
What a fucking clown you are. I know what Foster is, you fucking retard. I',m mocking you for thinking you're a lawyer.
Pull your head out of your ass, pay attention to Subdivision 2, retard. And then go fuck yourself:
609.19 MURDER IN THE SECOND DEGREE. Subdivision 1.Intentional murder; drive-by shootings. Whoever does either of the following is guilty of murder in the second degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 40 years: (1) causes the death of a human being with intent to effect the death of that person or another, but without premeditation; or
(2) causes the death of a human being while committing or attempting to commit a drive-by shooting in violation of section 609.66, subdivision 1e, under circumstances other than those described in section 609.185, paragraph (a), clause (3).
§Subd. 2.Unintentional murders. Whoever does either of the following is guilty of unintentional murder in the second degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 40 years: (1) causes the death of a human being, without intent to effect the death of any person, while committing or attempting to commit a felony offense other than criminal sexual conduct in the first or second degree with force or violence or a drive-by shooting; or
(2) causes the death of a human being without intent to effect the death of any person, while intentionally inflicting or attempting to inflict bodily harm upon the victim, when the perpetrator is restrained under an order for protection and the victim is a person designated to receive protection under the order. As used in this clause, "order for protection" includes an order for protection issued under chapter 518B; a harassment restraining order issued under section 609.748; a court order setting conditions of pretrial release or conditions of a criminal sentence or juvenile court disposition; a restraining order issued in a marriage dissolution action; and any order issued by a court of another state or of the United States that is similar to any of these orders.
So clearly the bolded is what Chauvin was being tried for under this provision
This again is where I really do wonder about the concept of reasonable doubt and whether the order was satisfied.
To convict on this, I think you'd have to show that Chauvin was acting in a manner inconsistent with his training. My understanding from listening to the news today prior to the verdict was that the defense made a fairly significant attempt to tie his actions with his training. If the actions were consistent with his training, then I think it's hard to say he "intentionally inflicted or attempted to inflict bodily harm" part of the provision. Maybe you argue the duration and the words of Floyd as crossing the line. I could see it going either way on that one.
I do find it interesting that the penalty of up to 40 years is the same whether intentional or unintentional ... that just seems strange to me. Unintentional to me just screams manslaughter. And while I'm sure that there are reasons for it, getting multiple murder degree convictions AND a manslaughter conviction on the same singular event seems like piling on.
It's actually classic bootstrapping to elevate the charges and penalties. It's not completely accurate to say "intent is not required" for a 2nd degree charge. It is required, but for the underlying felony offense, which in this case was 3rd degree assault, but not the intent to kill. This allows prosecutors to charge people with murder when it's not really a 1st or 2nd degree murder, but somebody falls down the stairs and breaks their neck while you're robbing their safe in their study. Too bad, chump. You're facing a murder charge.
I don't care the @dflea gang chews this bone all week or not. They can have their fun. The only part of the trial I paid any attention to was the verdict today, which I accurately predicted, but which made no mention of the underlying 3rd degree assault offense. And the problem I have with that theory and statute is how many times people are charged with a felony they had no idea or intent to commit, which I believe occurred in the Chauvin case. I.e., if Floyd lived, there'd be no assault charge, but because he died, grievous bodily harm is obvious and up pops the 3rd degree assault charge which then pops again into Murder 2. Is that what we want our cops thinking about on patrol?
You didn't pay attention, but shot off your mouth as if you did.
Shocking, really.
Nobody cares what you believe, dipshit. There was a jury. You're just making excuses for talking out your ass.
Hey - did you know Foster is the business school at UW and not the law school?
Why yes I did. And I'm aware that you didn't get in and it eats away at your soul every minute of the day. I've witnessed your pain. It's sad.
You fags are talking about "felony murder," i.e., when you're engaged in the commission of a felony and somebody dies, they bump it up and bootstrap it into a murder charge. Intent is not required for the murder charge because it's bootstrapped within the commission of the felony and if somebody dies, you're fucked.
Fine. I'll give your "unintentional murder" charge its due, but intent is not absent, it lies within the lesser felony offense, which they then inflate to murder.
And since you're so interested, and angry @dflea, you should definitely be aware of this next time you visit MN:
609.223 ASSAULT IN THE THIRD DEGREE. Subdivision 1.Substantial bodily harm. Whoever assaults another and inflicts substantial bodily harm may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than five years or to payment of a fine of not more than $10,000, or both.
So if you kick a guy's ass at your next bar brawl, and he dies, you too could be a murderer. Pretty chickenshit maneuver, but it worked for the MN prosecutor, and if it stands, you'll see it here, too.
But since I have balls, I invite you gay chums to have as much fun as you like at my expense, here and now, for not paying attention to the Chauvin trial. I deserve it. And God knows I've earned it spanking your faggy asses around for years. Enjoy. Faggots.
I can tell it was painful for you to write this mea culpa, but apology accepted. Trying reading a single article next time before barreling in head-first into a topic. The bar for conversation here is low, yet you still didn't meet it.
Not painful at all. Balls do that for a guy.
Felony Murder is a legal fiction, but it sticks around for its supposed deterrent effect and my initial point was that it's not a "murder" when there's no intent and that is the law. Felony Murder is statutory, like statutory rape, where consent is given and there are no facts supporting a rape charge whatsoever, the law still calls it rape. While the killing is unintentional, the underlying felony is not and the "intent" is borrowed or transferred upward from there. Thus, you still need intent for murder 2, even when it's borrowed from another illegal act and "I didn't mean to" won't save your ass if the victim dies.
You fags are talking about "felony murder," i.e., when you're engaged in the commission of a felony and somebody dies, they bump it up and bootstrap it into a murder charge. Intent is not required for the murder charge because it's bootstrapped within the commission of the felony and if somebody dies, you're fucked.
Fine. I'll give your "unintentional murder" charge its due, but intent is not absent, it lies within the lesser felony offense, which they then inflate to murder.
And since you're so interested, and angry @dflea, you should definitely be aware of this next time you visit MN:
609.223 ASSAULT IN THE THIRD DEGREE. Subdivision 1.Substantial bodily harm. Whoever assaults another and inflicts substantial bodily harm may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than five years or to payment of a fine of not more than $10,000, or both.
So if you kick a guy's ass at your next bar brawl, and he dies, you too could be a murderer. Pretty chickenshit maneuver, but it worked for the MN prosecutor, and if it stands, you'll see it here, too.
But since I have balls, I invite you gay chums to have as much fun as you like at my expense, here and now, for not paying attention to the Chauvin trial. I deserve it. And God knows I've earned it spanking your faggy asses around for years. Enjoy. Faggots.
I can tell it was painful for you to write this mea culpa, but apology accepted. Trying reading a single article next time before barreling in head-first into a topic. The bar for conversation here is low, yet you still didn't meet it.
Not painful at all. Balls do that for a guy.
Felony Murder is a legal fiction, but it sticks around for its supposed deterrent effect and my initial point was that it's not a "murder" when there's no intent and that is the law. Felony Murder is statutory, like statutory rape, where consent is given and there are no facts supporting a rape charge whatsoever, the law still calls it rape. While the killing is unintentional, the underlying felony is not and the "intent" is borrowed or transferred upward from there. Thus, you still need intent for murder 2, even when it's borrowed from another illegal act and "I didn't mean to" won't save your ass if the victim dies.
Thus, you still need intent to commit unintentional murder.
lmao
Keep going, stupid. This is fun watching you try to wipe the dumbass off yourself.
You fags are talking about "felony murder," i.e., when you're engaged in the commission of a felony and somebody dies, they bump it up and bootstrap it into a murder charge. Intent is not required for the murder charge because it's bootstrapped within the commission of the felony and if somebody dies, you're fucked.
Fine. I'll give your "unintentional murder" charge its due, but intent is not absent, it lies within the lesser felony offense, which they then inflate to murder.
And since you're so interested, and angry @dflea, you should definitely be aware of this next time you visit MN:
609.223 ASSAULT IN THE THIRD DEGREE. Subdivision 1.Substantial bodily harm. Whoever assaults another and inflicts substantial bodily harm may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than five years or to payment of a fine of not more than $10,000, or both.
So if you kick a guy's ass at your next bar brawl, and he dies, you too could be a murderer. Pretty chickenshit maneuver, but it worked for the MN prosecutor, and if it stands, you'll see it here, too.
But since I have balls, I invite you gay chums to have as much fun as you like at my expense, here and now, for not paying attention to the Chauvin trial. I deserve it. And God knows I've earned it spanking your faggy asses around for years. Enjoy. Faggots.
I can tell it was painful for you to write this mea culpa, but apology accepted. Trying reading a single article next time before barreling in head-first into a topic. The bar for conversation here is low, yet you still didn't meet it.
Not painful at all. Balls do that for a guy.
Felony Murder is a legal fiction, but it sticks around for its supposed deterrent effect and my initial point was that it's not a "murder" when there's no intent and that is the law. Felony Murder is statutory, like statutory rape, where consent is given and there are no facts supporting a rape charge whatsoever, the law still calls it rape. While the killing is unintentional, the underlying felony is not and the "intent" is borrowed or transferred upward from there. Thus, you still need intent for murder 2, even when it's borrowed from another illegal act and "I didn't mean to" won't save your ass if the victim dies.
Thus, you still need intent to commit unintentional murder.
lmao
Keep going, stupid. This is fun watching you try to wipe the dumbass off yourself.
Actually Yes. Intentional felonious conduct. Is this still tripping you up? Seems so.
Comments
Fine. I'll give your "unintentional murder" charge its due, but intent is not absent, it lies within the lesser felony offense, which they then inflate to murder.
And since you're so interested, and angry @dflea, you should definitely be aware of this next time you visit MN:
609.223 ASSAULT IN THE THIRD DEGREE.
Subdivision 1.Substantial bodily harm. Whoever assaults another and inflicts substantial bodily harm may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than five years or to payment of a fine of not more than $10,000, or both.
So if you kick a guy's ass at your next bar brawl, and he dies, you too could be a murderer. Pretty chickenshit maneuver, but it worked for the MN prosecutor, and if it stands, you'll see it here, too.
But since I have balls, I invite you gay chums to have as much fun as you like at my expense, here and now, for not paying attention to the Chauvin trial. I deserve it. And God knows I've earned it spanking your faggy asses around for years. Enjoy. Faggots.
So good for you, stupid.
I don't care the @dflea gang chews this bone all week or not. They can have their fun. The only part of the trial I paid any attention to was the verdict today, which I accurately predicted, but which made no mention of the underlying 3rd degree assault offense. And the problem I have with that theory and statute is how many times people are charged with a felony they had no idea or intent to commit, which I believe occurred in the Chauvin case. I.e., if Floyd lived, there'd be no assault charge, but because he died, grievous bodily harm is obvious and up pops the 3rd degree assault charge which then pops again into Murder 2. Is that what we want our cops thinking about on patrol?
To me, to bootstrap the charge up you have to first convict the individual of the 3rd degree assault to make the murder charge therefore relevant. But like you said, no real mention of that.
I guess you could get a conviction of the 3rd degree assault charge but the law as you presented looks fairly vague to me (likely with reason).
The more I think about this the more I begin to lean to the facts not really mattering in this case because it was always going to be convict to the max and then go to appeal. Anything less would have been a disaster. I don't look forward to what comes of the appeals.
The police chief and MSM are lying sacks of shit
I don't understand why Chauvin's attorney spent so much time on alternative causes of death. No way in hell he was ever getting around the "knee to the neck" causation problem, so WTF? Might have looked good in a diagram, but everyone knows the knee is what killed the guy, so go for the "nobody ever told him that could kill a guy" defense, especially since it was a prescribed restraint method in the training manual. Concede that the knee killed him, claim it was accidental, and beg the jury for forgiveness. Otherwise, you're fucking with a murder conviction in prison. Bad outcome is all but guaranteed.
Shocking, really.
Nobody cares what you believe, dipshit. There was a jury. You're just making excuses for talking out your ass.
Hey - did you know Foster is the business school at UW and not the law school?
Everyone loses but me
Felony Murder is a legal fiction, but it sticks around for its supposed deterrent effect and my initial point was that it's not a "murder" when there's no intent and that is the law. Felony Murder is statutory, like statutory rape, where consent is given and there are no facts supporting a rape charge whatsoever, the law still calls it rape. While the killing is unintentional, the underlying felony is not and the "intent" is borrowed or transferred upward from there. Thus, you still need intent for murder 2, even when it's borrowed from another illegal act and "I didn't mean to" won't save your ass if the victim dies.
lmao
Keep going, stupid. This is fun watching you try to wipe the dumbass off yourself.