LogFAQs > #876349682

Cacciato posted...

bshwalker posted...

So what should she be charged with?
All she did was drive to and from the house.
That's not illegal.

Are you fucking kidding me

No.
I'm trying to understand the Darknights line of thinking.
The very next post shows that.
I can't get on board with anyone that doesn't understand why she is charged with murder.
She planned the whole thing and took them there.
She is an accessory to a crime. A crime where 3 people were killed because the plan went into a tailspin and hit the ground.
You don't charge people for what they intended to do. They get charged for what happened.
It was her very own actions, against someone that she knew, that resulted in 3 people being killed.
It is how the law works.

I used an example earlier of a real life event. Two guys were crossing a street, one of them decides to snatch an old ladies purse. She falls and hits her head on the ground. She was taken to the hospital and had a heart attack a few days later. Not only did the snatcher get charged with murder but the other guy was charged as well because he chose to run away with the snatcher, making himself an accomplice.
Neither one of them killed or meant to kill the lady, but it was the actions that created the circumstances that led to her death. By joining his friend, the other guy, that had been doing nothing but walking across the street with his idiotic friend, became an accomplice.
If a person plans and organizes a bank robbery, his accomplices get killed by the police, the mastermind is charged with the deaths of his accomplices because he/she created the circumstances with the deaths.
Whether that charge sticks will be determined in court. It can be reduced or proven there, not on arrest.
The mastermind is not an accomplice. They are the creator.
We will just have to disagree on this. It makes perfect sense to me. The court is where it all gets worked out.
---

Being called nostalgic is a compliment. Thanks for noticing!
~C.O.I.~