Life plus 419 years

Chesterton said:

Here's a

Chesterton said:

Here's a cite

Click to expand...

Chesterton said:

to the Virginia law about leaving the scene of an accident. You need to provide me with the cite showing it's illegal to leave the scene of a murder. Or a rape. Or an arson. Or a jaywalking. Or any other intentional act.

Click to expand...

cite to the Virginia law about leaving the scene of an accident. You need to provide me with the cite showing it's illegal to leave the scene of a murder.

Click to expand...

I already provided you with the argument. You're just being legalistic.

The scene was that of an accident regardless of it actually being a murder. Leaving it was illegal as he has a duty to stay, render aid, and submit to authorities.

The laws are for civil people and he went above and beyond to be uncivil, but when you hit someone with your car and drive off you are going to be charged with leaving the scene.

variant said:

I already provided you with the argument. You're just being legalistic.

Click to expand...

I'm being legalistic about the law? Kinda like saying "you're just being scientific about science".

The scene was that of an accident regardless of it actually being a murder.

Click to expand...

This sentence is simply a contradiction. If it was an accident he should be serving 9 years at most, and not multiple lifetimes.

Chesterton said:

I'm being legalistic about the law? Kinda like saying "you're just being scientific about science".

Click to expand...

Legalistic isn't good even for lawyers.

It's when you lose sight of the point of the law when debating it's details.

Here's your corollary for science:


xkcd: The Difference

This sentence is simply a contradiction. If it was an accident he should be serving 9 years at most, and not multiple lifetimes.

Click to expand...

Well they found him guilty of the murder.

You being mad that they also charged him with leaving the scene is just an interesting oddity.

variant said:

Legalistic isn't good even for lawyers.

It's when you lose sight of the point of the law when debating it's details.

Click to expand...

No, no, I totally get the distinction between the letter and the spirit of the law, and the importance of it. I'm a huge fan of making the distinction. In this case, it's just not there. Legally speaking, a murder cannot be an accident, and an accident cannot be a murder.

Well they found him guilty of the murder.

You being mad that they also charged him with leaving the scene is just an interesting oddity.

Click to expand...

I never said I was mad. I just noted the glaring logical contradiction.

variant said:

Leaving the scene when you've hit someone with a vehicle is illegal weather you meant to hit that person or not.

Generally when people hit and run it is because they intend to evade consequences.

The idea that it would be legal to leave the scene after a murder with a vehicle and not legal to leave after an accident is ludicrous.

Click to expand...

Please explain the logic of why you can get 9 years for leaving the scene of a murder with a car, but no additional time for leaving the scene of a murder with a gun?

The problem with complaining about leaving the scene of the accident is that it was an accident. At the moment the car plows into the people and drives off, you don't know if this was drug or alcohol related, falling asleep at the wheel, distracted driving, or an intentional act. While it certainly looks like an intentional act with malice, an investigation still needs to be carried out. What is readily apparent, regardless of how or why the person left, when he drove off to flee the scene, he was leaving the scene of an accident.

Here's a good read: Car Accident or Crash? Why What You Call It Matters

Some safety advocates prefer using the term "accident," A few of the arguments for continuing to describe a collision as a traffic "accident" include:

1. Most traffic violations — from running over a curb to fatal collisions — are unintentional. Therefore, most traffic incidents can be technically defined as an accident.
2. All collisions routinely undergo a thorough investigation to determine the cause and what or who is at fault.
3. Legislative bodies and law enforcement agencies take action to solve problems that lead to traffic incidents — such as passing drunk driving laws and suspending licenses of irresponsible drivers. As a result, they do place fault on guilty drivers and bring awareness to the consequences of negligent driving.

Click to expand...

Nithavela said:

Please explain the logic of why you can get 9 years for leaving the scene of a murder with a car, but no additional time for leaving the scene of a murder with a gun?

Click to expand...

Because in this society, car collisions require that people don't just drive off.

Chesterton said:

No, no, I totally get the distinction between the letter and the spirit of the law, and the importance of it. I'm a huge fan of making the distinction. In this case, it's just not there. Legally speaking, a murder cannot be an accident, and an accident cannot be a murder.

I never said I was mad. I just noted the glaring logical contradiction.

Click to expand...

It's one that doesn't matter. They could in fact word the law better that you aren't allowed to leave the scene of a collision or injury while operating a motor vehicle.

variant said:

Because in this society, car collisions require that people don't just drive off.

Click to expand...

Maybe you should make a similiar law for bullet collisions.

jayem said:

On the surface, it may seem logically contradictory.

Click to expand...

Not just on the surface.

But that's what prosecutors do in any such high-profile criminal case.

Click to expand...

These days they do it in lots of low-profile cases, too. They just do it a lot. It's a notch on their belt if they succeed. Makes them look tough on crime, smart and hard-working. It's good for their careers.

The suspect gets charged with any and every violation that could be related to the crime. So if one charge doesn't stick, then maybe another one will. The jury decides. It's done all the time.

This is what it means to throw the book at someone.

Click to expand...

I know of that. In my neck of the woods I think we have something called the "lesser included offense", where you're charged with a serious crime and also a lesser crime which could fit the elements of the offense, in case the jury doesn't find that you committed the more serious crime. But for the jury it's an "either/or" decision. They can convict you of one or the other, but not both.

jayem said:

On the surface, it may seem logically contradictory. But that's what prosecutors do in any such high-profile criminal case. The suspect gets charged with any and every violation that could be related to the crime. So if one charge doesn't stick, then maybe another one will. The jury decides. It's done all the time.

This is what it means to throw the book at someone.

Click to expand...

Its usually done to the few shmucks who dont want to accept a plea deal and actually insist on their day in court. Its an intimidation tactic, because if every criminal would insist on a trial, the american court system would immediately collapse.

jayem said:

Well, in this case, the jury found him guilty on all counts. But their sentencing recommendation is just that. The judge can reduce it. So maybe the 9 years for leaving an accident scene can be dropped. Which leaves life plus 410 years. I'd say that's a fair sentence.

Click to expand...

Sentencing is irrelevant to what I'm talking about. We have a bifurcated system where the guilt/innocence phase and the sentencing are two distinct, separate phases of the trial. What's interesting is that apparently the jury found the same act to be both intentional and accidental. And some judge let this happen.

variant said:

Because in this society, car collisions require that people don't just drive off.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I don't get it either

Drive with reasonable care, collide with person, leave scene of accident - get charged
Drive recklessly, collide with person, leave scene of accident - get charged
Drive drunk, collide with person, leave scene of accident - get charged
Drive with intent to kill someone, collide with person, leave scene of accident - Freebie!