Does the punishment fit the crime?

i'd say it does, bcos he chickened out as the train was barreling down on him...

I can’t say that this would fly – I would have to believe that for a conviction of even first degree murder, the prosecution would need to prove premeditation. Doesn’t appear that there was much premeditation in this situation. At least premeditation to murder others.

Region, you make a good point, but still, it seems like there should be another, more appropriate punishment. Maybe he should be sentenced to die, and then right before they pull the switch to zap him in the electric chair, Ashton Kutcher can come out and go "Haaa, you just got punked!"

It would be an ironic punishment, but that doesn't mean it isn't fitting. He is dangerous, and has shown no concern for the lives of others in his suicide attempt.

Considerate people kill themselves with pills, or at least in the bathtub so it's easy to clean up.

Oh my gosh, kicky, you have me laughing--I do have a weakness for black humor!

As for the punishment, the guy was suicidal. He wasn't thinking of anything but possibly ending his life. Even those who commit suicide in a "thoughtful" way aren't thinking clearly and can't possibly realize the tragic effect on the family that is left behind. Basically, they are thinking only of themselves which is typical of clinical depression. Sad and tragic, but they are not sane and shouldn't be charged with murder--years in a psychiatric facility yes, but not for premeditated murder.

I agree with Diane. That man belongs in a psychiatric hospital, not a prison.

If the D.A. insists on bringing criminal charges, I think that the charge of murder will not "fly", The deaths certainly were not premeditated. At the worst, IMO, he could be charged with multiple counts of criminally negligent homicide,....................but murder, no!

I would say "ignorant homocide" he probably assumed the train would pass right through him and he would be the only one to suffer. If he was considerate enough to think about the other people involved and think they wouldn't suffer then he was just ignorant, not negligent.

No mens rea, I would have thought.

Reckless manslaughter? Reckless disregard???? Anyhoo - a serious charge....

This looks like revenge, which I can understand - a lot of people seem to think that is what the criminal justice system is for. Makes me feel sick, as a motive - but I can imagine there is a lot of understandable baying for blood going on at the appalling lack of regard for others of the would-be suicide, and the terrible results. I mean, it is bad enough if the problem is one limited to a very traumatised train driver.

I would have thought there needs to be a warning to others component to any sentence -(though how efective that will be is moot - if it gives but one idiot pause, it is likely worth it) but death?

Pure vengeance.

But I agree with scoates - if I ever kill myself, I will go out of my way to make as little messa nd unpleasantness for anyone as possible.

Deb, the revenge is by far the strongest reason for calling for murder charges. When something this terrible happens, a sort of mass hysteria occurs demanding blood for blood. Politicians seldom have the character or the restraint to try to reason with the mob.

It's interesting - here the "DA" position would be Director of Public Prosecutions. It is NOT a political appointment - though, most extraordinarily, we recently had ours resign due to losing trhe confidence of the government - this was unprecedented.

I think it ought NOT to be a voted for position - but an appointment based on merit and experience.

Your system seems, to me, to violate separation of powers, in a very real way - though probably not technically - and help lead to bowing to mobs.

Not that the effects of popular opinion are not felt here - and I think they ought to be PART of the equation in the legal system - but it seems to me that your system enshrines them in a manner I find concerning.

Yes - and it is very understandable.

However, I think the law exists to separate us from the vagaries and problems of being ruled by strong emotion when it comes to "justice" - not to embody them, as you think too.

As an LA person, who has a background in studying our dispersed city, I long longed for decent transportation - just a background on me -

and I can also feel this guy's thing about zapping himself, with no intelligence to the consequence.

I don't think any of us suppose he could have foreseen the destruction, the dumpkopf, which is what the nuns in my gradeschool called us when we were stupid.

So, jumping ahead, I perceive this fellow as depressed and sublimely stupid, dangerous as all get out.

How does a train system guard for stupid.

I gather from some reports that there are ways, but, having been on the designing end of some public works, let me say it is hard to guess just how stupid people can be.. The motivator, generally, that I know of, among designers, is to do well and take care, and yes, go to lunch. But, primarily to make things work.

So, I gather from some reading in the last day or two that various efforts could have been made to thwart such a guy.
I suppose that might be true.

This is an odd realm though, in that it is hard to figure, on a construction budget item, how to protect against suv suiciders who get stuck backing up.

Do they need to erect flame throwers at every intersection?

If in fact they did the equivalent of that, all of society would change for the worse.

And yet, the overhead shot of that train crash is a shot of complete pain.

I suspect the answer to that one, from my POV, Osso, is that "sheiss happens" and "nobody here gets out alive".

If commonly occurring things can be reasonably guarded against, well and good.

But - we live in a world where any random event - like, say, a tsunami, or a meteorite, or a blood vessel bursting, or an out of control car, can end our lives, at any second. And the only thing we know in life is that it will end.

This is a sort of preamble to saying that, horrific and tragic as the event was, life generally is very safe - and I think we tend to be obsessed with safety - almost as though we think nothing bad should ever happen and "someone" should have stopped it when it does. (NOT saying that you think like this Osso - but many do.)


Well, bad stuff is gonna happen.

It is probably not reasonable to try to guard against stupid almost-suiciders in SUVs - (though personally I would love to see SUVs almost a thing of the past - but I digress...) - unless that is doable at reasonable effort and expense.

Though, thing is, with the publicity this one has had, copycats are a spooky reality.

Still, I get a lot of email from the design community, bla and bla, and the newspaper, and links through my friend the arch historian, and old neighbors, and ... I saw some stuff questioning how that suv got there, then, but data flies by me.

My bias at this point is that there was naught wrong with the intersection. I hope not, for LA's sake. But I don't know that.

I have three crfiteria for the death penalty:

• Guilt beyond any doubt whatsoever.
  
• Too dangerous to risk having escape or otherwise ever be free again.
  
• Not doing the guy any favors to keep him around.
  

This guy satisfies one and three, but not two. Somebody like Charles Manson satisfies all three criteria.

What I do know, is that whatever fur flies among land use folks in LA, they all care that transportations systems get a move on.

I didn't mean that to sound or be so cold, that systems get a move on. My whole point is a certain wonderment, perhaps not well expressed, as to how to stop a guy like this.