Roman150 Posted May 2, 2015 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 7 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 128 Content Per Day: 0.04 Reputation: 44 Days Won: 0 Joined: 12/04/2014 Status: Offline Birthday: 10/14/1958 Share Posted May 2, 2015 So can the wanton acts of violence, vandalism, and lawlessness by the 'protesters' stop now? How many injured innocents will have to pay for this, in your opinion? Biblical support, please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burning_Ember Posted May 2, 2015 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 21 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 2,009 Content Per Day: 0.30 Reputation: 100 Days Won: 3 Joined: 09/20/2005 Status: Offline Author Share Posted May 2, 2015 Yes, it does. That is what separates it from manslaughter. http://definitions.uslegal.com/d/depraved-heart-murder/ Depraved-heart murder is a killing that results from gross negligence. For example, if a man practicing shooting in his backyard, located in a suburban area, accidentally shoots and kills someone, he can be charged with murder under the depraved-heart theory. http://www.vox.com/2015/5/1/8529761/freddie-gray-depraved-murder Second-degree murder is the killing of another person while acting with an extreme disregard for human life. In order to convict the defendant of second-degree murder, the State must prove: (1) that the defendant caused the death of (name); (2) that the defendant's conduct created a very high risk to the life of (name); and (3) that the defendant, conscious of such risk, acted with extreme disregard of the life-endangering consequences. As for manslaughter; (3rd degree) http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/manslaughter The unjustifiable, inexcusable, and intentional killing of a human being without deliberation, premeditation, and malice. The unlawful killing of a human being without any deliberation, which may be involuntary, in the commission of a lawful act without due caution and circumspection. So, manslaughter is killing someone without due caution. For example, if you recklessly drove a car and accidentally killed someone, that might be vehicular manslaughter. 2nd degree depraved heart is similar, the difference being that the person knowingly took action that would recklessly endanger someones life, but didn't care. So if you drove a car recklessly, knowing that you would be recklessly endangering someones life, and showed indifference to that, and then killed them without intent to kill... That could fit under 2nd degree depraved heart murder. So, do explain why manslaughter (3rd degree murder) and 2nd degree depraved heart murder are not appropriate charges to file, since that is your position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted May 2, 2015 Share Posted May 2, 2015 Actually, it varies from state to state. There are states where 3rd degree murder is intentional. You cannot simply post definitions as if this a one-size-fits-all kind of thing. Different states look at it differently. I found definitions on the internet that differ from the ones which you cite, so you are cherry picking the ones that fit your narrative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burning_Ember Posted May 2, 2015 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 21 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 2,009 Content Per Day: 0.30 Reputation: 100 Days Won: 3 Joined: 09/20/2005 Status: Offline Author Share Posted May 2, 2015 Actually, it varies from state to state. There are states where 3rd degree murder is intentional. You cannot simply post definitions as if this a one-size-fits-all kind of thing. Different states look at it differently. I found definitions on the internet that differ from the ones which you cite, so you are cherry picking the ones that fit your narrative. http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/D/DepravedHeartMurder.aspx The definition as given by Robinson vs State, in Maryland, by Justice Adkins. "Depraved heart murder is the form of murder that establishes that the wilful doing of a dangerous and reckless act with wanton indifference to the consequences and perils involved, is just as blameworthy, and just as worthy of punishment, when the harmful result ensues, as is the express intent to kill itself. This highly blameworthy state of mind is not one of mere negligence. It is not merely one even of gross criminal negligence. It involves rather the deliberate perpetration of a knowingly dangerous act with reckless and wanton unconcern and indifference as to whether anyone is harmed or not. The common law treats such a state of mind as just as blameworthy, just as anti-social and, therefore, just as truly murderous as the specific intents to kill and to harm." The definition in my previous post is how that works in Maryland, specifically, where Baltimore is. So again, could you please explain why those two charges would not be appropriate in this case? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted May 2, 2015 Share Posted May 2, 2015 Well for one thing information is coming forward that preliminary toxicology reports are showing large amounts of heroin and MJ in Gray's system. The police thought they saw Gray make a drug deal. He was a known drug dealer. He has a long rap sheet. They saw him and he fled and they gave chase but he had disposed of the drugs by they caught up with him. Dealers will ingest drugs to dispose of them. He was a mostly a dealer and not a user. He was not a stranger to these officers. If swallowed multiple pills, it would explain why he was acting erratically and slamming himself against the walls of the van. We shall see if this pans out or not. I have not seen the evidence that show that justify 2nd degree murder. This was political. This is about appeasing a mob. The evidence needs to come to light. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burning_Ember Posted May 2, 2015 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 21 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 2,009 Content Per Day: 0.30 Reputation: 100 Days Won: 3 Joined: 09/20/2005 Status: Offline Author Share Posted May 2, 2015 We'll see at trial. The most interesting thing I find is the chain of events. From the perspective of a protester/activist, they might say Trayvon Martin might have been one of the big more recent cases that may have been the first of this kind. The protests were not as large, and were less disruptive, and they did not get a conviction. In Ferguson (and the solidarity protests) that is when the tactics of shutting things down (a very common chant) started. Those continued in Baltimore, and got far more people out, were far more co-ordinated, they organized it with the previous guys from Ferguson, and they got it going much much faster than Ferguson. If I had to simply guess at how this trial is going to turn out... I imagine it would turn out to be either a conviction or a retrial followed by a conviction. The Officers aren't convicted of any crime, they are innocent until proven guilty.. But I've read through loads of material on this and I think that it is very likely the prosecutor went into this very confident they could get convictions on most if not all of these charges. Why these charges in particular were chosen, and whether they could get convictions on each of them was pretty confusing, and took a few hours thinking, but I think I understand what she is going for. If all of these were different episodes, I think the protesters will be consistently, if not more energized for the next one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted May 2, 2015 Share Posted May 2, 2015 Having reviewed what the Baltimore prosecutor stated on TV when she made her announcement, she said, "I have heard you loud and clear." Or something to that effect... This is why I see this more of an appeasement. She, to the surprise of many, delivered these charges very swiftly. Most expected her to give more deliberation and this may have been a mistake on her part. These six officers may have been sacrificed on the altar of appeasement in order to restore calm and order. This story is evolving and as more evidence comes to light, everything we think we know at this point will change and evolve with the new information. This will go to trial and it is not a slam dunk. So far we have only been getting ONE side of the story and we have NOT heard from the officers under oath at this point. The Left has a narrative... That narrative is that black people are unfairly targeted by the police and the Left as completely bought into the "black" narrative, the "victim" narrative and they every time there is an altercation with the police, especially if the police are white, the Left runs with the, "this was a racist cop who unfairly targeted a black man." That is the assumed narrative and every thing else is filtered through that assumption. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted May 2, 2015 Share Posted May 2, 2015 BE, It doesn't really matter what you have read... This is a changing situation and the information that you claim you have may not be wholly accurate the longer this drags out. So really, it is rather silly to assume that you can proceed as if what information you have represents the truth of what happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steward George Posted May 2, 2015 Group: Steward Followers: 110 Topic Count: 10,465 Topics Per Day: 1.25 Content Count: 27,786 Content Per Day: 3.33 Reputation: 15,483 Days Won: 129 Joined: 06/30/2001 Status: Online Birthday: 09/21/1971 Steward Share Posted May 2, 2015 What's interesting about this case is the "race" narrative is constantly being played! But as someone that lived (and my parents still live) in Baltimore, this race narrative being played out is really dividing the country. 3 of the officers being charged in this case are black! The mayor of the city is black. The police commissioner is black. 50% of the city police force is black! http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/baltimore-riots/bs-md-fop-letter-20150501-story.html In this story you can see the pictures of the officers being charged. We're a country more divided now -- then we were 20 years ago! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted May 2, 2015 Share Posted May 2, 2015 Yes the race narrative that has been used before doesn't work in Baltimore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts