Poll of the Day > Three teen burglars shot and killed by homeowner's son.

(+) Yeah! (+)

I feel because it was the criminals who chose to willingly participate in the crime, their deaths should not legally be on her hands. If anyone innocent had died, I'm all for charging her with murder, but it seems silly to be charged for that reason.

To go to the purse snatching example, what would have happened if the old lady was fine but the thief had a heart attack? Would the friend that fled the scene with him be charged for the murder of the thief? Thats obviously absurd. I'm not really here to argue what the law is, just what it should be (since laws do get changed and all). Charging her with accessory to armed robbery seems fine to me.

Of course, luck does tend to play a part in your punishment. A drunk driver who swerves off the road and hits a tree committed the exact same actions as a drunk driver who swerves off the road onto a sidewalk with people on it but the punishment will of course be very different because of the different result.

There is clearly nothing wrong with the shooting itself. Even if they appear unarmed, the burden of finding that out for sure shouldn't be on the home owner. You break into a house, you accept you may get shot to death with no one to blame but yourself. No extra risk should have to be taken by the innocent person living at the home.
---

YoukaiSlayer posted...

I feel because it was the criminals who chose to willingly participate in the crime, their deaths should not legally be on her hands. If anyone innocent had died, I'm all for charging her with murder, but it seems silly to be charged for that reason.

To go to the purse snatching example, what would have happened if the old lady was fine but the thief had a heart attack? Would the friend that fled the scene with him be charged for the murder of the thief? Thats obviously absurd. I'm not really here to argue what the law is, just what it should be (since laws do get changed and all). Charging her with accessory to armed robbery seems fine to me.

Of course, luck does tend to play a part in your punishment. A drunk driver who swerves off the road and hits a tree committed the exact same actions as a drunk driver who swerves off the road onto a sidewalk with people on it but the punishment will of course be very different because of the different result.

There is clearly nothing wrong with the shooting itself. Even if they appear unarmed, the burden of finding that out for sure shouldn't be on the home owner. You break into a house, you accept you may get shot to death with no one to blame but yourself. No extra risk should have to be taken by the innocent person living at the home.

Very nice post with thought provoking questions!
Actually, what you said there was going to be my final post on the subject.
Laws can and should be changed.
Sometimes the law is taken advantage of in order to satisfy a desire for retribution.
I genuinely have no opinion on this.
It's another tragedy among thousands every day.
No amount of applied justice can do what really would be the only way to make this all right-
Go back in time and prevent the whole thing from happening in the first place...

Make good choices, people.
Bad ones cannot be reversed.
---

Untagging this topic. It's just repetitive now.
---

bshwalker posted...

I'm trying to understand the Darknights line of thinking.
[...]
She is an accessory to a crime.

You just answered your own question - she's an accessory to burglary. She should be charged as such. Charging her with three counts of first degree murder means we are treating this woman - a low-level, non-violent street criminal whose level of planning consisted of picking which house they were going to rob - as being morally equivalent to a serial killer.

bshwalker posted...

The mastermind is not an accomplice. They are the creator.

Calling her "the mastermind" is an exaggeration. Based on what we know thus far, the decision to commit a robbery was a group decision; this woman simply suggested which house they should hit.

bshwalker posted...

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.

This is a majorly flawed example for one very obvious reason: in your example, it's the victim who died - in the real case, it's the culprits who died.

As I posted earlier, if the situation had been different and the homeowner or his son had been killed by the robbers, I would have no problem seeing this woman charged as an accessory to murder/manslaughter. But that's not what happened.

The woman bears full responsibility for the burglary, I don't deny that for a minute. She bears partial responsibility for her fellow robbers' actions, as she was involved in planning the robbery, which is why I have no issue with accessory charges and why I say she would have some moral blameworthiness if her co-conspirators injured or killed someone during the crime. But she is not responsible for the homeowner's son's actions, which were ultimately what killed her three accomplices.
---

I take issue with someone being charged with murder, when no murder was committed.
---

darkknight109 posted...

But she is not responsible for the homeowner's son's actions, which were ultimately what killed her three accomplices

According to Oklahoma law, she is. Ignorance of a law doesn't mean it doesn't apply to you.
---

Jen0125 posted...

darkknight109 posted...

But she is not responsible for the homeowner's son's actions, which were ultimately what killed her three accomplices

According to Oklahoma law, she is. Ignorance of a law doesn't mean it doesn't apply to you.

No one's disputing that - the point is the law is really fucking dumb, especially in this application.
---

darkknight109 posted...

No one's disputing that - the point is the law is really fucking dumb, especially in this application.

that's like your opinion man

obviously law makers in OK feel differently
---

deoxxys posted...

Gun used as intended

success

Yep. Bad idiots dying is always good.
---