I would say not guilty in this case. The reason is because, in the end, the assailant did no harm. It’s the same as if he intended to kill him, but decided to change his mind. No harm done. No crime committed.
(He may be guilty of doing something illegal with a corpse, but that’s a seperate issue).
cool! Not only does Sua call me “Mr.”, something I choose to belive is a positive development, but I have addressed something I had no idea existed.
As for shooting the corpse: IMHO, I’m certainly guilty of attack with a deadly weapon or something along those lines - I’m in deeper trouble than “just” abusing a corpse. It can be argued that I must have been convinced that I was committing a crime. So I guess I disagree with US law there. I suppose a good defense lawyer will point out that there’s no way of knowing my exact intent - I might have just wanted to maim the victim a bit, not kill him - and so I might be able to escape being on trial for murder.
In practice, I can certainly see the usefulness of looking at the outcome first and intent second. But sometimes one is completely out of proportion to the other, and I guess another practice is needed then. Or perhaps I’m just set in my ways ?
Noooooo, Manny!! I feel safe and warm and cozy in GQ. Now were in cold, harsh GDland, run by those meanies ** David B. and Gaudere**. I just know they’re gonna taunt me.
That could then be left up to the discretion of the prosecutor to decide what to charge a person with; just as now a prosecutor usually has some leeway to decide between murder 1, murder 2 or manslaughter.
However, without the act, it is, admittedly, hard to judge the intent. You usually do not try to kill someone by pushing them (unless it’s off a cliff), so I would say it would be hard to prove intent. Shooting someone, however, is usually done with intent to kill.
**
Because once you pull the trigger, IMHO, you must accept responsibility for what happens afterwards. Therefore, even if you “change your aim” at the last minute, you’d still be guilty of murder.
Well, you could make the same argument about third-strike laws as well. You could say that a guy with two strikes holding up a pizza store might as well kill off the workers because if he’s caught he’s going to jail for life anyway.
Your points on deterrence are well-taken. I need to think for a while to come up with a rejoinder to this. It is a valid point.
Zev Steinhardt
Naw, David B and Gaudere are just fine. But they’re very religious, remember, so you will want to have a prayer ready for them.
Try this one – I’m sure it will work.
The Mods are thy Shepherds, thou shall not want.
They maketh you to post threads in correct forums:
They leadeth you beside the double posts.
They restoreth your VB code:
They leadeth you in the paths of righteousness for thy fellow members’ sake.
Yea, though you walk through the valley of the BBQ Pit,
Ye will fear no personal insults; for They art with you:
Their rod and their staff, they shall comfort you.
They preparest a thread before you in the presence of thine enemies;
They annointest your good points in praise; your post count runneth over.
Surely goodness and mercy shall follow you throughout the Board,
and you will dwell in the House of Cecil forever.
Where does the case of Charles Rothenberg fit it. He poured kerosene over his 6 year old son and set him on fire, causing third degree burns over 95% of his body, and then just left him in the hotel room alone. Because the child didn’t die, this father (retch) got 11 years in prison.
This man did not commit a crime against a woman, but a 12 year old GIRL! He also denied doing the crime and filed a lawsuit against the child for lying about him in court, false imprisonment, harassment, and a few other things.
He should have had his arms cut off. And his genitals too.
Zev, your proposals are essentially what is reflected in typical American criminal law.
This is the standard doctrine of “attempt.” As far as I am aware, most states have a general “attempt” statute that makes it a crime to attempt to commit some other crime; there are not separate statutorily-defined crimes like “attempted murder” or “attempted arson.” For example, here is New York’s general attempt statute:
Pretty simple. Most jurisdictions punish an attempted crime with the same sentencing range that would apply if the crime were completed. See N.Y. Penal L. s. 110.05. Thus, a person who intends a murder and acts to bring it about is subject to the same punishment regardless of whether he was successful or not.
For non-class A felonies in N.Y. (that is, non-violent felonies), punishment for the attempt is one lower class of crime-- e.g. atttempting a Class C felony warrants the punishment set forth for a Class D felony. The rationale is that “the drafters apparently believed that since the consequences of an attempt were generally less serious that those of the consummated crime, the attempt deserved a less serious penalty. Subsequent legislation, premised on the belief that certain attempts were as serious as the consummated crime, classified five attempts at the same classification as the consummated crime.” Commentaries to N.Y. Penal L. s. 110.05 (Emphasis added).
O.k., how about “Manslaughter in the Second Degree”:
“Recklessness,” in legal terms, means that you lacked specific intent to cause harm, but did something that you knew posed a serious risk of injury to another and that you consciously disregarded that risk. In the statutory commentaries on Man2, it states “For manslaughter, there must exist a substantial and unjustified risk that death will result; the risk must constitute a grosss deviation from the standard of care that a reasonable person would observe in the situation.” The street sign theives are a crystal-clear example of an appropriate Man2 prosecution: they did not intend to harm anyone, but knew that removing the sign posed a serious risk of injury to others.
Not quite correct. Here’s
Even better, here’s the commentary on the section:
Thank you Nurlman for the legal analysis. That being said, my point is that attempted murder should be the top charge and face the top penalty (possibly death in death penalty states, or whatever the top charge is in non-DP states).
