Quote:
Originally Posted by Rebellion";p="
Using your scenario would be like the NY Times saying tomorrow that Charles Manson is innocent because Squeaky Fromme said she killed everyone and not present all of the previous evidence against Manson because "it's already in the public record."
|
The reporter simply presented the opinions of the investigators who stood up and told us he was innocent. I call that newsworthy. That never happened in the Manson case.
It is not considered bias to present only new evidence. No reporter is expected to re-report a case that has already public record.
Quote:
|
Not all DA's are publicly elected. And it doesn't change the fact that they can't operate on their own. Somebody has to present a case to them.
|
But ultimately their job is to get convictions. They are not accountable to the police. The police give them the evidence, and the DA uses it (or does not). That is where the relationship ends.
Quote:
|
Doesn't matter. In the link I provided no one even claimed he intentionally killed anyone. That is part of the reality that is committing murder in the commission of a felony. You don't necessarily have to pull the trigger yourself of have any plans to have done so to be convicted of murder.
|
Ahh I see, so I am guilty of murder if I am simply standing next to the crime scene? So if I am present at the crime, and there is no evidence I pulled the trigger and no evidence that I coerced anyone to pull the trigger, I am guilty of murder and worthy of execution?
Quote:
|
Wayne R. LaFave, Criminal Law 682 (3d ed. 2000); Model Penal Code § 210.2 cmt. 6 (1980) (noting that “[t]he classic formulation of the felony-murder doctrine declares that one is guilty of murder if a death results [b]from conduct during the commission or attempted commission of any felony”). The history of the felony-murder rule in the United States is briefly described in the commentary to the Model Penal Code. Model Penal Code § 210.2 cmt. 6 (1980).
|
This applies to cases in which the suspects are involved in another felony. Here is a cursory summary of the Tafero case:
"Early on the morning of February 20, 1976, a Florida highway patrolman and his friend, a visiting Canadian constable, approached a car parked at a rest stop for a routine check. Jesse Tafero, Sonia Jacobs, their two children, and Walter Rhodes, a prison friend of Tafero’s, were asleep in the car. Allegedly, the patrolman saw a gun on the floor of the car. He woke the occupants and had Rhodes and then Tafero get out of the car. At some point after that, both the patrolman and the constable were shot. After fleeing the scene in the patrolman’s car, and then dumping the car, kidnapping a man, and stealing his car, the three were caught at a roadblock. Rhodes, Tafero, and Jacobs were all arrested. Rhodes turned state’s evidence in exchange for a plea to a lesser charge. Tafero and Jacobs were tried and convicted of capital murder. "
http://www.lairdcarlson.com/grip/Taf...%20Summary.htm
Can you make a case that Tafero killed the policemen while committing a felony? Neither could the DA, which is why the DA convinced Rhodes to testify against Tafero and name him as the trigger man. Then Rhode's confessed to doing it himself.