Quote:
|
However, the line between felony assault and attempted murder is a blurry one. If one person goes after another with a pipe, is that attempted murder? What about a baseball bat? Does it depend on how physically resilient the would-be victim is? That is why, I believe, murder is distinguished from attempted murder. The potential variables in establishing that murder was the intent when no one died are innumerable.
|
Somewhere in the Constitution, there's a passage which has been interpreted to mean that a person cannot be tried for the crime they tried to commit - only the crime they actually committed. I disagree with that interpretation. I believe it's talking about thinking about committing a crime or even planning one, but never actually taking any physical steps to commit one.
There are already many nuances in murder charge. 1st degree, 2nd degree, negligent, etc. The level of intent is always part of the charge, and often part of the jury's decision. Take the case of the teenage girl who was raped, bludgeoned, had her arms cut off below the elbows and was left in a ditch to die. The jury should have been given the option of the death penalty. As it happened, the perp served about 8 years, was paroled, and ultimately killed another woman who wasn't as "lucky" as his first victim. Allowing the death penalty for attempted murder simply gives the option to juries. I just gave one example. If a prosecutor wants to go for the death penalty in a baseball bat case, he would need to prove that the perp knew that death was a likely result - the intelligence or education of the defendent could come into play. The jury can decide.