General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums"A guy with a gun pursuing and shooting a guy without a gun adds up to manslaughter,"
per MSNBC lawyer. WHY? Sounds like premeditated Murder One to me.
rfranklin
(13,200 posts)Don't think that one would fly in court.
MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)Sounds like he knew EXACTLY what he wanted to do and was planning to do it.
rfranklin
(13,200 posts)I think he had an itchy trigger finger but I can't prove it.
ashling
(25,771 posts)magical thyme
(14,881 posts)he planned to leave his car; he wasn't obligated to and in fact was supposed to stay in it to meet with the police. He planned to pursue. he planned to confront. he planned to shoot.
Premeditation is planning.
HockeyMom
(14,337 posts)Besides ignoring 911 operator and pursuing, taking his gun out of his car when he confronted Trayvon, would be enough for premeditation. If he didn't intend to use his gun, he wouldn't take it out of the his car. Intent is the factor in that.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)But definitely more than manslaughter.
Ganja Ninja
(15,953 posts)I think Trayvon beaned him with a can of ice tea and the asshole pulled out his gun and shot him because he was pissed. Not premeditated but murder just the same.
TheWraith
(24,331 posts)A guy planning out how to murder his business partner is murder one. Chasing somebody down who you've never met before, it's basically impossible to prove that there is pre-planned intent to kill them.
Second, the charges will likely be either manslaughter or murder two depending on what the prosecutor thinks they can nail. Murder two is certainly possible, but there's no telling whether the prosecutor will pass up the slightly higher charge in favor of the one that's basically a lock to prove. A 100% chance of conviction for manslaughter may outweigh an 80% chance of a conviction for murder two, particularly if your point is to prove that the justice system works--the last thing you want is for the guy to go loose because you charged higher than you could prove beyond a reasonable doubt.
Ecumenist
(6,086 posts)TheWraith
(24,331 posts)But then again people have also made the case that if the President does something, then by definition it's not illegal. That doesn't make it a realistic argument. In court, you need to be able to prove premeditation, not just assume it happened.
Mariana
(14,860 posts)Proving it in court would be difficult. Unless the killer said "I'm going to kill you!" and then did it. Hard to argue there's no premeditation in a case like that. Otherwise, it's going to be pretty tough to prove.
MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)It can happen right before a murder.
Ecumenist
(6,086 posts)carrying a 9 mm to ask him over for tea and crumpets.
MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)That sounds premeditated to me.
Daniel537
(1,560 posts)How it could be anything less is beyond me.