So, you don’t think that throwing a large rock off an overpass (which, in SC at least, not sure about TN, and that destructive device arguement is a stretch) could (if no property damage and no injuries) constitue attempted manslaughter (a felony,) reckless endangerment (a felony,) assault (a felony,) armed assault (a felony,) assault with a deadly weapon (a felony,) or if you’re looking for a federal felony, interfering with interstate commerce. Since there were others there, who assisted in the comission of the crime, add criminal conspiracy (another felony) to it.
And since they killed someone in the comission of a felony…
Again, if his intent was to cause grevious bodily harm, and kills someone, that’s murder one on the grounds that the death occured while comitting another felonious act.
Doesn’t matter if he did. By the definitions, he was charged with first degree. He’s lucky not to have gotten the needle.
They weren’t young teenagers. They were about 18-19 years old at the time, which makes them legally adults and more than a few years past the age of “Oh, they’re just kids having fun!”
Honestly, I don’t know of anyone found to be involved in one of these incidents who didn’t face serious consequences. Legal remedies seem to be a bit much to suggest. This isn’t a matter of people thinking that what they’re doing is legal, but rather they failed to consider the reality of what meeting, say, a twenty pound turkey at 65 MPH might do to someone.
I have no objections to having the turkey or rock (Or, for that matter a pillow, used to smother a bedridden person.) considered a device for the purposes of this law.
Now, I can see the argument for sentencing based on a lesser charge. As I said in the EMT thread, prosecutors get a lot of room for choosing what to charge someone with, and I don’t want to see prosecutorial discretion to go away. IMNSHO, that’s where things like lower sentences and specific gradations of murder and manslaughter should be first considered. (I’m not about to suggest taking away trying an accused on First degree, Second degree murder and manslaughter charges, to see what the jury will think is appropriate for a specific crime. Just that the first triage is always done by the prosecutor/DA.)
Having said that, I don’t think this is a gross violation of the kid’s rights, either.
The exact same thing happened here in Auckland a few months back (link). They charged the 14 year old kid with murder, (there’s no distinction between first and second degree here) but I’m not sure what happened in the end.
As far as I can tell, in Tennessee, first degree felony murder is:
In South Carolina, your state, that you’re referencing, it doesn’t seem like your definition would work either. South Carolina doesn’t have a seperate “felony murder” charge, but instead, if a person is conviced of murder, the jury deciding whether he gets the death penalty or not has to consider mitigating and aggravating circumstances. According to the SC Code of Laws, the aggravating circumstance related to another crime being convicted at the same time is,
So it wouldn’t apply in that case either. In fact, your argument seems logically flawed. Almost any time a murder is committed, a person could also be charged with other, lesser offenses. For example, if you and I get in a fight and I punch you in the nose, that’s assault. If you then die from the punch in the nose, that elevates it to murder/manslaughter, but the assault is a fundimental part of the murder/manslaughter.
I’m not a lawyer, but it seems to me that a law written using your definition would mean that pretty much every murder is a capital crime.
I think they got what they deserved. And I agree that a rock deliberately thrown off of an overpass into a car that can reasonably be expected to be moving at least 55 mph is definitely a “destructive device.” Look at it this way, if they threw a rock up into the engine of a 747 as it was taking off, causing the plane to crash, it would be considered a destructive device. A destructive device requires someone to set it into motion. Dropping a rock on a car and setting a pipe bomb require the exact same deliberate action: planning, obtaining and using an object to cause harm.
And besides that, they fully intended to hit the car. Any moron knows that it could kill someone. They deliberately tried to kill someone, and I don’t believe them when they say they didn’t. I hope they rot.
Not going to get involved in the legal argument here, but something very similar happened to me.
7 or 8 years ago I was driving down a bypass. As I was driving along suddenly something crashed into my windshield. I noticed kids running away from the bluffs along the side of the road.
Luckily I wasn’t hurt. It didn’t even break the windshield (took a chunk out, but it didn’t shatter). I was pretty shaken. I stopped the car and went up to where I had seen the kids. We were able to track them down and the police came. I never heard of any further proceeding against them. I did find the rock they threw. It was pretty much round, about the size of a softball and weighed about the same as a brick.
Shook me up, I must say. I consider myself lucky that I wasn’t done an injury.
Because, apparently, a “destructive device” is defined by statute, and “a rock” isn’t in that definition. If you had a cannon that shot rocks, that would be a destructive device.
Because it’s a deadly weapon (sometimes called a dangerous weapon).
From the wiki article, specifically about Wisconsin, statute §939.22(10), but there are similar laws throughout the US,
“Dangerous weapon” means any firearm, whether loaded or unloaded; any device designed as a weapon and capable of producing death or great bodily harm; any electric weapon, as defined in s. 941.295 (4); or any other device or instrumentality which, in the manner it is used or intended to be used, is calculated or likely to produce death or great bodily harm.Throwing a rock at some one can get you charged with assault with a deadly/dangerous weapon, NOT assault with a destructive device!