Where to try the snipers first?

Because of the multiplicity of jurisdictions in which the alleged crimes were committed, I think the Federal courts should have initial jurisdiction. The perpetraors are alleged to have crossed state lines to commit their felonies. It's that soimple.

And I'm still forgetting to use spell-check. Simple!

Don't have an opinion, so didn't vote. Whichever jurisdiction has the tightest case would get my vote.

Andrew, spell check is not the only feature you haven't discovered. There is also an 'edit' feature. You can actually go back and fix your original to make it say what you really meant! Isn't this great?

What gets me, is the states are agruing over the one which has the death penalty,should go first.
I do not believe in the death penalty.

My guess is that MD has the best case so I think they should go first. Personally, I think they should charge them with 2 cases at a time in MD. That way, if they manage to find a sympathetic jury the state isn't left without anything to charge them with as a follow up. Once these two are convicted someplace the rest won't really matter. I'd guess these two won't be seeing anything but prison walls for teh rest of their lives.

I just hope that the venue isn't a minor-executing state.

Captial punishment is primitive enough without doling it out to minors. I hope both get life (assuming they are guilty).

Craven- I disagree- This was not a "one shot deal" where a kid got caught up over his head. This was a long term, calculated, killing spree. I believe that when the evidence is presented, and the perps are found guilty, the death penalty is the ONLY rational solution, for both the murderers!

I did find it pretty disturbing that Virginia was touting their death penalty stats ("Hey, use us, we like to fry people!"). I voted for federal, as it really is the logical choice. Everyone else is pretty much posturing.

Thing is, since this isn't a case of federal law (except for the fact that the crimes were committed in several states), the federal court will have to 'borrow' the state's laws. My mind is tapioca as I cannot recall what this is called, but suffice it to say one (or more) state's law is going to be used, even if the matters are all tried in federal court.

My vote, then (preferences aside), is for Maryland law to be used. Not only are most of the victims from there, but (a) the arrestees are already there, in custody and (b) it will probably be argued that the planning of the murders in Virginia and DC was done in Maryland. Hence, Maryland is the only really logical choice. And, as I said above, they have the death penalty but a moratorium, whereas federal court has the death penalty and no such restriction.

I suspect that the only safe prediction is that this one will be in the courts for years, and the decisions will probably hit Law School texts as soon as they're published.

As for the question re the juvenile, it's kind of a moot point. There's apparently a question as to whether Malvo is 18 or 17, as previously stated. But that shouldn't matter. This is a major series of crimes and he will be tried (and very likely punished) as an adult. This isn't like the King brothers, who were 14 and 13 (I think I have the ages right) when they killed their father. This is a minor (if he still is a minor) who is very near adulthood who allegedly abetted some very serious crimes, probably perpetrated a few of them himself, and committed conspiracy to commit murder.

We'll have to agree to disgree, on several points.

I don't think there is ever only one logical way to proceed (I'm a big fan of lateral thinking) and my qualm isn't with executing a minor. It's with capital punishment.

I'd love to kill the snipers myself and it's that base urge of mine that makes me think that human's baser instincts shouldn't be standardized as punishments. I also happen to think that life in prison can be a worse punishment that the death penalty.

I really don't care where they try them first. I just wish they'd decide so we wouldn't have to hear the whole macabre discussion about who has a better death penalty.

My opinions on such penalty are variable (sometimes I'm for it and sometimes I'm against it). But it sickens me to here these folks compare and contrast this way.

I also would like to think that, assuming the outcome of the first trial is guilty and there is appropriate sentencing, each and every other jurisdiction will not feel it is necessary to spend taxpayers money running another trial. I can see one or two doing it -- just in case the original verdict is overturned for some technicality. But overkill (maybe literally) is a bit much.

Maybe Jespah knows the answer to this.

The Federal court system has the death penalty. But there is no Federal law against murder, unless the victim is a member of the Government (this includes all Federal employees). So how could the death penalty apply in this case? More specifically, on what charge would they be tried in a Federal court, since there can be no charge of plain and simple murder?

The Federal Courts can step in if the crime in question crosses state lines. In this case, both MD and VA had victims within the spree of shootings so they can claim "Interstate Commission" the crimes.

IMO, I think the Federal Charges should be the last ones sought. Right now they have tied shootings in MD, VA, WA, AL and LA to these people. They just added another shooting that happened in Silver Springs MD 2 weeks before the big spree started so the total dead from the accused now stands at 14.

fishin', I understand that the Feds have jurisdiction because of the interstate aspects of the crime. My question is, on what charges can the Feds try the suspects in the absence of a Federal law against murder?

They'll go after them using Firearms charges. So far the adult has been charged with:

"Conspiracy to commit offenses against the United States"
"Conspiracy to affect interstate commerce by extortion and threats of violence"
"Affecting interstate transportation by extortion and threats of physical violence"
"Interstate transportation in the aid of racketeering"
"Firing a weapon in a school zone"
"Use of a firearm during commission of a crime of violence causing death of a person."

That last one carries a possible death penalty. It isn't a murder charge per se but they still have to prove that he murdered people and then they have to prove he used a firearm to do it.

Merry Andrew--

I believe one of the victims was a Federal employee--which means the death penalty could apply.

If I were a taxpayer in any of the states which possibly have jurisdiction, I'd be glad for some other state to try him. Perhaps his defense team will insist that he can't get a fair trial in either Virginia or Maryland and ask for a change of venue to somewhere in the midwest?

Where ever it takes place the trial is going to be a very expensive circus.

What fishin' said (re federal jurisdiction). I voted for federal to go first, mainly because they can best tie the whole shebang together, and therefore their trial will probably be the longest but also the most thorough. But I believe that, generally, they should be borrowing from Maryland law. Regardless of what one thinks of the death penalty, the vast majority of the offenses occurred and/or were planned (hence, conspiracy charges) in Maryland.

'Course here's a point to ponder - what happens if one state sentences them to death and another sentences them to life imprisonment? Which state gets to go first with its penalty? The Supreme Court has looked at that question, by the way, but if I recall correctly they didn't settle it too terribly satisfactorily. I predict they'll be revisiting that question.

Jes - I thought the rule was that sentences got carried out in the sequence they were ordered?

Yep, they should be carried out in order. Hence this is going to be one interesting tug of war in legalland. Do you go first but take a long time? Do you go last but rush, rush, rush? Man, justice should be served but I bet it'll be a great opportunity for every applicable DA to try to make a national name for him/herself.

MW -- from what I've heard on talk shows (and that's not always true) the fed death penalty is available because of the extortion charge in combo with the murder charges.