How soap-operaish.
They’d decided to separate after he caught her cheating, she felt that he wasn’t moving out of the apartment fast enough and came up with the brilliant idea of arranging a fake burglary to scare him off. What could go wrong?
Well; that could go wrong.
Never bring a fake gun to a knife fight.
Lucy! You got some 'splainin to do!
Oh, good, we have a plot for the sequel to I Love You To Death.
I guess he won’t have to worry about moving out.
Wow, that is messed up
I hate when that happens to me.
It’s like they were TV characters whom someone switched genres on midstream without warning; they thought they were still in a sitcom performing Wacky Hijinks, and walked right into a True Crime show.
Naw, she could make bail. It’s only… dang. Maybe he should consider redecorating.
Wow, takes guts to go for a knife with a gun in your face.
And this is exactly why all fake burglars need to have real guns.
No wait a second.
How bizarre.
There’s no limit to stupid in this world.
So they could, and did, arrest the wife and the surviving accomplices, who might all be charged with murder.
Is there a debate to be had here, over what crime they should be charged with? Somehow it seems wrong to charge someone with murder, who didn’t, you know, actually commit the murder. But they ought to be charged with something nasty. Should there be a special crime for that (perhaps just a bit less serious than murder)?
This reminds me of a case I recall reading about some years ago. A bank robber held up a bank at gun-point. The cops arrived just as he was escaping (IIRC), and shot and killed the robber. Then the cops (having some reason to believe that the robber had planned the robbery with his wife, although the wife wasn’t present at the scene), went to the robber’s home and arrested the wife. They charged her with murder in the death of her husband, even though he was actually shot by the police.
Should that have warranted a murder charge? (Sorry, I have no idea how that case played out.)
ETA: So. SHE cheated, and they decided to call it splitsville, but HE has to move out? :dubious: Why shouldn’t SHE have to move out?
The felony murder doctrine is not particularly controversial. If you commit a crime during which someone ends up dead, you’re guilty of murder. These guys apparently all conspired to commit B&E and assault (the predicate crimes) and are therefore culpable for their co-conspirator’s murder. The guy who actually killed him, though, is not. Funny how that works.
…incorrect.
Depending on circumstances, it seems like an accomplice would be charged with Manslaughter or 2nd degree murder rather than 1st degree. Unless, of course, it was a case of premeditated murder that all were party to. I could see this as a case for plea bargaining.
I understand it’s fairly common if controversial. A more usual example would be someone committing armed robbery and an elderly bystander dying of heart failure, and the robbers being charged as murdering him. The logic being that if they hadn’t committed the felony, the death wouldn’t have happened even though they never intended it.
Incorrect how? 46 states have codified felony murder rules. If there’s been a significant controversy about it since Edwin v. Florida (which was something like 30 years ago) I haven’t heard of it. But I am certainly not an expert in these matters.
ETA: That’s Enmund v. Florida (1982).
NRA will insist all buglers carry assault rifles now.
No, all cuckolds should carry assault rifles.
With bayonets.
