15
   

Kyle Rittenhouse question

 
 
neptuneblue
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Nov, 2021 02:19 am
@oralloy,
Rape isn't killing humans.

I'm surprised you don't know that.
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 13 Nov, 2021 02:26 am
@neptuneblue,
You dodged the question. That is evidence that you know I'm right.
neptuneblue
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Nov, 2021 02:29 am
@oralloy,
I'm recognizing the psychological damage Kyle has endured. You want to sweep that away and I'm not going to allow you to do that.

oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 13 Nov, 2021 03:32 am
@neptuneblue,
neptuneblue wrote:
I'm recognizing the psychological damage Kyle has endured.

No, you're proposing to abuse him and revictimize him.


neptuneblue wrote:
You want to sweep that away

That's a lie and you know it.
0 Replies
 
engineer
 
  2  
Reply Sat 13 Nov, 2021 04:59 am
But in the hypothetical, can a bank robber who is fleeing after killing a security officer claim self-defense if he shoots a pursuer?
neptuneblue
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Nov, 2021 08:00 am
@engineer,
No.

The Difference Between Murder and Manslaughter

by James Finsweet from LawBrother Ltd
22 Jun, 2021

Homicide, the act of killing other individuals, is one of the most serious offenses a person can commit. However, when talking about criminal homicide, it can be split into two distinct categories: murder and manslaughter. The difference between the two is based on the mindset of the killer at the time of the crime. While murder refers to the malicious killing of another person, manslaughter refers to either unintentional or non-premediated death. This small but important distinction means offenders will receive different sentences depending on the type of homicide.

For any criminal defense attorney working on a homicide case, knowing the difference between manslaughter and murder is key for formulating an effective strategy. In this article, we will discuss the difference between these crimes in more detail and the associated sentences with each.

Murder vs. Manslaughter vs. Homicide

As mentioned, both manslaughter and murder are forms of homicide, which is where one person kills another individual. So, if both refer to the act of killing, what is the difference between murder and manslaughter? The answer is in the mindset of the offender while they commit the act. Below we have defined each for a better understanding of the different types of homicide.

Definition of Murder

The laws for murder vary between each US state. However, no matter where in the United States the crime takes place, the unlawful killing has to be done with malice aforethought for it to be considered murder. This could mean that the murder was intentional and premeditated, though not always. If someone intentionally commits a dangerous act with no regard for the risks they are posing to other people and ends up killing someone, this too is considered murder, even though there was no previous planning involved.

To distinguish between these two different types of murder, there are different degrees a defendant may be charged with: (1) murder of the first degree and (2) murder of the second degree. First-degree murder refers to any killing that is both intentional and premeditated. On the other hand, second-degree murder is a killing that is with malice aforethought but is not premeditated. An example of this could be killing a person in the middle of a fight.

On top of these two degrees, there is also felony murder. This is where someone dies as a result of another dangerous and violent felony that has been committed, such as arson, rape, burglary, or robbery. Unlike murder of the first and second degree, it does not require intent to kill – there just needs to be intent for the predicate felony. For example, say three men were committing a burglary. If one of the felons was armed and ended up shooting and killing someone on the scene, all three men would be charged with murder. This is typically given the same punishment as a murder of the first degree.

Definition of Manslaughter

Manslaughter also refers to the act of killing someone, but this time without malice aforethought. It can never be premeditated, as that would make it a murder. However, manslaughter can both be an intentional or unintentional killing. To better define these two classifications, it is again split into two separate sub-categories: voluntary manslaughter and involuntary manslaughter.

Voluntary manslaughter occurs when an individual willfully kills someone but with no premeditation. The death is intentional but a result of being strongly provoked. For example, if a husband had just discovered his wife had been having an affair, he may lose control of his emotions and kill his wife in the heat of the moment. This is similar to second-degree murder. However, for the offense to be classified as manslaughter there has to be a clear provocation and emotional connection. For instance, if an accidental death resulted from a bar fight, this would be classed as murder of the second degree, rather than voluntary manslaughter.

Involuntary manslaughter comes with the least harsh of all homicide sentences. In these cases, the murder is an unintentional killing with no premeditation. The death results from either reckless disregard or criminal negligence. For example, if someone recklessly discharges a firearm into a crowd of people and someone dies, that is involuntary manslaughter. The intent to kill is not present, but the behavior is clearly irresponsible and has a high risk of injury or death.

Another example of involuntary manslaughter would be driving while intoxicated and having a road traffic accident in which someone gets killed. However, some US states may classify these crimes as “vehicular homicide,” which specifically pertains to road traffic accidents. All states, excluding Alaska, Montana, and Arizona, have vehicular homicide statutes.

Sentences for Manslaughter and Murder

The difference between manslaughter and murder lies in the defendant’s intentions and premeditation. The order of severity from highest to lowest is (1) first-degree murder, (2) second-degree murder, (3) voluntary manslaughter, and (4) involuntary manslaughter. In other words, the higher the degree of intent, the worse the punishment. Therefore, the distinction between the two not only lies in the definition but also the sentences handed out. First-degree murders that are both planned and intentional are seen as the most severe crime and have the most severe punishments, whereas an accidental involuntary manslaughter charge carries the least severe penalties.

The specifics of each case also hold weight on the type of sentence offered. Aggregate factors can make a case more severe and include having previous criminal convictions or murdering a member of law enforcement or military. On the other hand, mitigating factors can lessen the severity of a sentence. These include the defendant having no previous criminal history, being willing to take responsibility for the actions, and showing true remorse for the killing. There are also often different charges for juveniles, or if the killing was an act of self-defense.

Even with the aggregate and mitigating factors considered, the exact homicide charges handed out for each crime will depend on the jurisdictional laws of each state, or the federal laws if it is a federal crime. For example, in Florida, Idaho, Louisiana, and Tennessee, a defendant found guilty of first-degree murder with aggregating circumstances could be given the death penalty. According to the US Department of Justice, the death penalty can also be applied at the federal level. On the other hand, the same crime could receive a life sentence without parole in Colorado, Delaware, and Massachusetts.

Conclusions

murder vs. manslaughter

The difference between murder and manslaughter lies in the attacker’s thought process both before and during the killing. While all murders are with malice aforethought and are intentional, manslaughter cases are either the result of being strongly provoked or the accidental killing of another person.

The distinction between these two types of homicide lies not only in the definition but also in the charges given to convicted offenders. First-degree murder charges carry the most severe punishment of life imprisonment or death. There is then a sliding spectrum of charges through murder of the second degree, voluntary manslaughter, and involuntary manslaughter. However, even if case specifics are identical, it is the laws of each state that will determine the judge’s final sentencing.

If you are facing homicide charges yourself, always get in touch with a criminal defense lawyer. Your freedom, future, and rights are at stake, and appointing a professional to fight in your corner can drastically reduce the charges you are given.
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Nov, 2021 08:54 am
@neptuneblue,
I remember a story as a student, probably apocryphal, about a man who killed someone and disposed of the body by throwing him in a pit.

It turned out he couldn't be done for murder because he didn't kill him when he hit him over the head although he believed he had. The victim died from falling in the pit.

So when he intended to kill him he merely knocked him out, but when he did kill him there was no intention to kill so he could only be prosecuted for manslaughter.

Like I said it's probably apocryphal.
0 Replies
 
NSFW (view)
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Nov, 2021 09:11 am
Without looking at the specific language of some states’ Stand Your Ground laws, it would seem that since Rittenhouse went out of his way to put himself at the scene of a protest, armed, any deadly encounter wherein he killed someone would be his fault.

But then, I read my own states’ SYG law.

If his states’ language is similar, he’ll be exonerated.
He was legally hunting people.

Except of SC SYG ‘Castle’ law:

11/20/2019

(Text matches printed bills. Document has been reformatted to meet World Wide Web specifications.)
A BILL

TO AMEND SECTIONS 16-11-440 AND 16-11-450, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BOTH RELATING TO IMMUNITY FROM CRIMINAL PROSECUTION AND CIVIL ACTIONS UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES FOR THE USE OF DEADLY FORCE AGAINST ANOTHER PERSON (STAND YOUR GROUND), BOTH SO AS TO INCLUDE DISPLAYING DEADLY FORCE IN THE PURVIEW OF THE STATUTES.

Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of South Carolina:

SECTION 1. Section 16-11-440 of the 1976 Code is amended to read:

"Section 16-11-440. (A) A person is presumed to have a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily injury to himself or another person when using or displaying deadly force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily injury to another person if the person:

(1) against whom the deadly force is used or displayed is in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or has unlawfully and forcibly entered a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or if he removes or is attempting to remove another person against his will from the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle; and

(2) who uses or displays deadly force knows or has reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act is occurring or has occurred.

(B) The presumption provided in subsection (A) does not apply if the person:

(1) against whom the deadly force is used or displayed has the right to be in or is a lawful resident of the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle including, but not limited to, an owner, lessee, or titleholder; or

(2) sought to be removed is a child or grandchild, or is otherwise in the lawful custody or under the lawful guardianship, of the person against whom the deadly force is used or displayed; or

(3) who uses or displays deadly force is engaged in an unlawful activity or is using the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle to further an unlawful activity; or

(4) against whom the deadly force is used or displayed is a law enforcement officer who enters or attempts to enter a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle in the performance of his official duties, and he identifies himself in accordance with applicable law or the person using force knows or reasonably should have known that the person entering or attempting to enter is a law enforcement officer.

(C) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in another any place where he has a right to be, including, but not limited to, his place of business, has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his ground and meet force with force, up to and including deadly force, if he reasonably believes it is necessary to prevent death or great bodily injury to himself or another person or to prevent the commission of a violent crime as defined in Section 16-1-60.

(D) A person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter a person's dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle is presumed to be doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or a violent crime as defined in Section 16-1-60.

(E) A person who by force enters or attempts to enter a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle in violation of an order of protection, restraining order, or condition of bond is presumed to be doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act regardless of whether the person is a resident of the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle including, but not limited to, an owner, lessee, or titleholder."
0 Replies
 
maxdancona
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 13 Nov, 2021 09:28 am
@bobsal u1553115,
Hmmm....

So this guy that Bobsal posted believes that Black Lives Matters protesters are "terrorists" and "insurgents".

I wonder if Bobsal believes that the Black Lives Matters protesters are terrorists.
bobsal u1553115
 
  0  
Reply Sat 13 Nov, 2021 09:30 am
@maxdancona,
Stop trolling me.

Tou don't even respond to the posting. Why is it all personal with you????

Name one BLM supporter killing anyone, let alone three at a time.

Will you answer the question or troll me????

jcboy
 
  2  
Reply Sat 13 Nov, 2021 09:37 am
"Mom, can you take me to Wisconsin?"
"Sure, hun!"
The way there... nothing but f**kin' Breitbart, and Sean Hannity on the radio with this kids incoherent babbling about the radical left and how Trump "is the greatest president we've ever had".
They arrive.
"Mom... I'm gonna save America today."
"Okay, sweetie, have fun!"

They should lock her up too!
0 Replies
 
maxdancona
 
  -2  
Reply Sat 13 Nov, 2021 09:41 am
@bobsal u1553115,
They are throwing molotov cocktails at police cars and burning down businesses and shooting at police officers.

0 Replies
 
maxdancona
 
  -2  
Reply Sat 13 Nov, 2021 09:46 am
There is something really crazy with the political left.

This was a violent mob, some of them were armed, that were attacking police, throwing firebombs and burning down businesses.

But somehow, no one denounces the mob or the people who started it. It is fine to burn down businesses if you have the correct political ideology?

The left has gone crazy.
neptuneblue
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Nov, 2021 10:04 am
@maxdancona,
Kyle Rittenhouse killed two people and severely injured a third. He is now on trial for the killings.

Just in case you didn't realize what this thread was about...
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Nov, 2021 10:11 am
@bobsal u1553115,
Just ignore him, he's desperate for attention.

He hates being ignored.

And life is so much easier not having to deal with all that ****.

Of course that doesn't stop others quoting him, and I might respond to that, but like Oralloy he's so utterly predictable you know what he's going to say anyway.

So why bother?
0 Replies
 
maxdancona
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 13 Nov, 2021 10:29 am
@neptuneblue,
neptuneblue wrote:

Kyle Rittenhouse killed two people and severely injured a third. He is now on trial for the killings.

Just in case you didn't realize what this thread was about...


I have made my opinion pretty clear. Kyle Rittenhouse is innocent of murder and will be cleared of the most serious charges (if not all charges).

And I think the political left has gone crazy to excuse the violence of the protesters who are responsible for this volatile situation in the first place. Both of those are true.
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Nov, 2021 10:34 am
We have had riots over here, the police are trained on how to deal with them. There are procedures in place and there is specialist equipment to be used like body amour and shields, tactics to be used like kettling.

These tactics work, they are non violent and can contain really determined rioters throwing petrol bombs and bricks.

I remember the then pm David Cameron praising the police actions and saying how proud he was that they never used water cannons or rubber bullets, although the then mayor of London Boris Johnson had a water cannon on order.

Cameron then went on to make a wider point about how rubber bullets and water cannons had never been used on British streets. That was technically true, but only the case in mainland Britain. They had both been used extensively in Northern Ireland during the Troubles.

At the time there was a lot of criticism, and rightly so, of the use of such tactics. We're talking about water cannons and rubber bullets, live ammunition wasn't used to control rioters. When it did happen it was called The Bloody Sunday massacre, and the repercussions of extra judicial killings by the British army are ongoing.

This is an individual carrying out his own Bloody Sunday just for the sheer hell of it.
0 Replies
 
neptuneblue
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Nov, 2021 10:40 am
@maxdancona,
maxdancona wrote:
I have made my opinion pretty clear.


Ok then.

So, others who disagree with you shouldn't have a platform for their opinions?
0 Replies
 
hightor
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Nov, 2021 12:47 pm
Quote:
But then, I read my own states’ SYG law.

If his states’ language is similar, he’ll be exonerated.


Having fifty potentially different laws about when a person can legally kill someone is retarded. My state has a "Duty to Retreat" law. States under the influence of the Christian Taliban, on the other hand, entitle citizens to kill someone to prevent a violent crime. (I wonder, under these laws, if it's legal to shoot a person who is about to engage in a violent act of suicide?) Maybe the Supreme Court will come around and recognize the legitimacy of "honor killings" to protect one's family from shame and scandal.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Martin/Zimmerman Case: Jury Selection - Discussion by gungasnake
The Slender Man Murder Case - Discussion by tsarstepan
Three cheers for the FBI. - Discussion by izzythepush
Chicago now a war zone - Discussion by gungasnake
Solving bank robberies the hard way... - Discussion by gungasnake
Flouri-DUH vs Shellie Zimmerman - Discussion by gungasnake
Stealing pop and skittles - Discussion by gungasnake
DB Cooper may be in FBI's sights - Discussion by edgarblythe
 
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/24/2022 at 09:50:24