comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 minute ago
I had a little look at that TOOR but it seems very rare that it's ever actually used.
Let's be honest neither you nor I have a comprehensive understanding of US law and so perhaps it's more a case of waiting to see what happens.
I do believe though that the difference between kill and murder is partly the cause of debate here.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes it's rarely used across the US but is more commonly used in a few states with Minnesota being one of them, where the victim was killed.
I posted this yesterday.
The difference between third-degree murder and manslaughter often depends on the defendant's state of mind at the time of the killing. In Minnesota, for example, someone can be convicted of manslaughter in the second degree if they knew they were unreasonably risking someone else's life and took that chance. This is different from third-degree murder, where the person must act with a depraved mind and malice (wanton disregard for human life).
First-degree manslaughter — also called heat-of-passion manslaughter, or voluntary manslaughter — occurs when someone intentionally kills another person in the heat of the moment. Generally, they must have been strongly provoked in the moment and not have had time to cool off. Unlike third-degree murder, there is intent to kill, but it is assumed a reasonable person may have lost control of their emotions when similarly provoked.
Involuntary manslaughter, on the other hand, is the least serious of the charges (though still serious) because the killing was unintentional, and possibly accidental, but caused by the defendant's reckless behavior, such as drunken driving or DUI.
Defenses Against a Third-Degree Murder Charge
Defenses to a third-degree murder charge might include:
Innocence ("It wasn't me."
Insanity ("I was mentally impaired and didn't understand what I was doing."
Self-defense ("I was protecting myself from immediate and serious harm."
Defense of others ("I was protecting others from serious harm."
Exercise of duty ("I am a public officer who killed without unlawful intent, recklessness, or negligence.
With all due respect TOOR, you're searching for info on it and just trying to take in what you read... no one on this thread is an expert in US law from what I can gather and it's a very complex subject.
Ultimately, you say he murdered him but none of us really know that for sure.
We all think it was despicable and that he deserves whatever punishment comes to him.
The courts will decide... not too much to disagree on really, apart from terminology.
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 22 minutes ago
With all due respect TOOR, you're searching for info on it and just trying to take in what you read... no one on this thread is an expert in US law from what I can gather and it's a very complex subject.
Ultimately, you say he murdered him but none of us really know that for sure.
We all think it was despicable and that he deserves whatever punishment comes to him.
The courts will decide... not too much to disagree on really, apart from terminology.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You misjudge the feeling of the majority here. Us majority believe the cop was right to kill him for not getting in the far and having eaten some drugs.
comment by Benjamin Kallman (U1734)
posted 51 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 22 minutes ago
With all due respect TOOR, you're searching for info on it and just trying to take in what you read... no one on this thread is an expert in US law from what I can gather and it's a very complex subject.
Ultimately, you say he murdered him but none of us really know that for sure.
We all think it was despicable and that he deserves whatever punishment comes to him.
The courts will decide... not too much to disagree on really, apart from terminology.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You misjudge the feeling of the majority here. Us majority believe the cop was right to kill him for not getting in the far and having eaten some drugs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Some drugs, if he saw the far and refused to get in.
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 2 hours, 32 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 minute ago
I had a little look at that TOOR but it seems very rare that it's ever actually used.
Let's be honest neither you nor I have a comprehensive understanding of US law and so perhaps it's more a case of waiting to see what happens.
I do believe though that the difference between kill and murder is partly the cause of debate here.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes it's rarely used across the US but is more commonly used in a few states with Minnesota being one of them, where the victim was killed.
I posted this yesterday.
The difference between third-degree murder and manslaughter often depends on the defendant's state of mind at the time of the killing. In Minnesota, for example, someone can be convicted of manslaughter in the second degree if they knew they were unreasonably risking someone else's life and took that chance. This is different from third-degree murder, where the person must act with a depraved mind and malice (wanton disregard for human life).
First-degree manslaughter — also called heat-of-passion manslaughter, or voluntary manslaughter — occurs when someone intentionally kills another person in the heat of the moment. Generally, they must have been strongly provoked in the moment and not have had time to cool off. Unlike third-degree murder, there is intent to kill, but it is assumed a reasonable person may have lost control of their emotions when similarly provoked.
Involuntary manslaughter, on the other hand, is the least serious of the charges (though still serious) because the killing was unintentional, and possibly accidental, but caused by the defendant's reckless behavior, such as drunken driving or DUI.
Defenses Against a Third-Degree Murder Charge
Defenses to a third-degree murder charge might include:
Innocence ("It wasn't me."
Insanity ("I was mentally impaired and didn't understand what I was doing."
Self-defense ("I was protecting myself from immediate and serious harm."
Defense of others ("I was protecting others from serious harm."
Exercise of duty ("I am a public officer who killed without unlawful intent, recklessness, or negligence.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Are those defences against third degree murder charges, or excuses when Shaaggy’s girlfriend catches him with another woman?
comment by rosso - for your protection, we’ve installed this camera (U17054)
posted 15 hours, 56 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 2 hours, 32 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 minute ago
I had a little look at that TOOR but it seems very rare that it's ever actually used.
Let's be honest neither you nor I have a comprehensive understanding of US law and so perhaps it's more a case of waiting to see what happens.
I do believe though that the difference between kill and murder is partly the cause of debate here.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes it's rarely used across the US but is more commonly used in a few states with Minnesota being one of them, where the victim was killed.
I posted this yesterday.
The difference between third-degree murder and manslaughter often depends on the defendant's state of mind at the time of the killing. In Minnesota, for example, someone can be convicted of manslaughter in the second degree if they knew they were unreasonably risking someone else's life and took that chance. This is different from third-degree murder, where the person must act with a depraved mind and malice (wanton disregard for human life).
First-degree manslaughter — also called heat-of-passion manslaughter, or voluntary manslaughter — occurs when someone intentionally kills another person in the heat of the moment. Generally, they must have been strongly provoked in the moment and not have had time to cool off. Unlike third-degree murder, there is intent to kill, but it is assumed a reasonable person may have lost control of their emotions when similarly provoked.
Involuntary manslaughter, on the other hand, is the least serious of the charges (though still serious) because the killing was unintentional, and possibly accidental, but caused by the defendant's reckless behavior, such as drunken driving or DUI.
Defenses Against a Third-Degree Murder Charge
Defenses to a third-degree murder charge might include:
Innocence ("It wasn't me."
Insanity ("I was mentally impaired and didn't understand what I was doing."
Self-defense ("I was protecting myself from immediate and serious harm."
Defense of others ("I was protecting others from serious harm."
Exercise of duty ("I am a public officer who killed without unlawful intent, recklessness, or negligence.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Are those defences against third degree murder charges, or excuses when Shaaggy’s girlfriend catches him with another woman?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Scooby doo
Sign in if you want to comment
Get ready for riots if this is true
Page 15 of 15
11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15
posted on 6/8/20
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 minute ago
I had a little look at that TOOR but it seems very rare that it's ever actually used.
Let's be honest neither you nor I have a comprehensive understanding of US law and so perhaps it's more a case of waiting to see what happens.
I do believe though that the difference between kill and murder is partly the cause of debate here.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes it's rarely used across the US but is more commonly used in a few states with Minnesota being one of them, where the victim was killed.
I posted this yesterday.
The difference between third-degree murder and manslaughter often depends on the defendant's state of mind at the time of the killing. In Minnesota, for example, someone can be convicted of manslaughter in the second degree if they knew they were unreasonably risking someone else's life and took that chance. This is different from third-degree murder, where the person must act with a depraved mind and malice (wanton disregard for human life).
First-degree manslaughter — also called heat-of-passion manslaughter, or voluntary manslaughter — occurs when someone intentionally kills another person in the heat of the moment. Generally, they must have been strongly provoked in the moment and not have had time to cool off. Unlike third-degree murder, there is intent to kill, but it is assumed a reasonable person may have lost control of their emotions when similarly provoked.
Involuntary manslaughter, on the other hand, is the least serious of the charges (though still serious) because the killing was unintentional, and possibly accidental, but caused by the defendant's reckless behavior, such as drunken driving or DUI.
Defenses Against a Third-Degree Murder Charge
Defenses to a third-degree murder charge might include:
Innocence ("It wasn't me."
Insanity ("I was mentally impaired and didn't understand what I was doing."
Self-defense ("I was protecting myself from immediate and serious harm."
Defense of others ("I was protecting others from serious harm."
Exercise of duty ("I am a public officer who killed without unlawful intent, recklessness, or negligence.
posted on 6/8/20
Again excuse the winks
posted on 6/8/20
With all due respect TOOR, you're searching for info on it and just trying to take in what you read... no one on this thread is an expert in US law from what I can gather and it's a very complex subject.
Ultimately, you say he murdered him but none of us really know that for sure.
We all think it was despicable and that he deserves whatever punishment comes to him.
The courts will decide... not too much to disagree on really, apart from terminology.
posted on 6/8/20
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 22 minutes ago
With all due respect TOOR, you're searching for info on it and just trying to take in what you read... no one on this thread is an expert in US law from what I can gather and it's a very complex subject.
Ultimately, you say he murdered him but none of us really know that for sure.
We all think it was despicable and that he deserves whatever punishment comes to him.
The courts will decide... not too much to disagree on really, apart from terminology.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You misjudge the feeling of the majority here. Us majority believe the cop was right to kill him for not getting in the far and having eaten some drugs.
posted on 6/8/20
comment by Benjamin Kallman (U1734)
posted 51 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 22 minutes ago
With all due respect TOOR, you're searching for info on it and just trying to take in what you read... no one on this thread is an expert in US law from what I can gather and it's a very complex subject.
Ultimately, you say he murdered him but none of us really know that for sure.
We all think it was despicable and that he deserves whatever punishment comes to him.
The courts will decide... not too much to disagree on really, apart from terminology.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You misjudge the feeling of the majority here. Us majority believe the cop was right to kill him for not getting in the far and having eaten some drugs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Some drugs, if he saw the far and refused to get in.
posted on 6/8/20
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 2 hours, 32 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 minute ago
I had a little look at that TOOR but it seems very rare that it's ever actually used.
Let's be honest neither you nor I have a comprehensive understanding of US law and so perhaps it's more a case of waiting to see what happens.
I do believe though that the difference between kill and murder is partly the cause of debate here.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes it's rarely used across the US but is more commonly used in a few states with Minnesota being one of them, where the victim was killed.
I posted this yesterday.
The difference between third-degree murder and manslaughter often depends on the defendant's state of mind at the time of the killing. In Minnesota, for example, someone can be convicted of manslaughter in the second degree if they knew they were unreasonably risking someone else's life and took that chance. This is different from third-degree murder, where the person must act with a depraved mind and malice (wanton disregard for human life).
First-degree manslaughter — also called heat-of-passion manslaughter, or voluntary manslaughter — occurs when someone intentionally kills another person in the heat of the moment. Generally, they must have been strongly provoked in the moment and not have had time to cool off. Unlike third-degree murder, there is intent to kill, but it is assumed a reasonable person may have lost control of their emotions when similarly provoked.
Involuntary manslaughter, on the other hand, is the least serious of the charges (though still serious) because the killing was unintentional, and possibly accidental, but caused by the defendant's reckless behavior, such as drunken driving or DUI.
Defenses Against a Third-Degree Murder Charge
Defenses to a third-degree murder charge might include:
Innocence ("It wasn't me."
Insanity ("I was mentally impaired and didn't understand what I was doing."
Self-defense ("I was protecting myself from immediate and serious harm."
Defense of others ("I was protecting others from serious harm."
Exercise of duty ("I am a public officer who killed without unlawful intent, recklessness, or negligence.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Are those defences against third degree murder charges, or excuses when Shaaggy’s girlfriend catches him with another woman?
posted on 7/8/20
comment by rosso - for your protection, we’ve installed this camera (U17054)
posted 15 hours, 56 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 2 hours, 32 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 minute ago
I had a little look at that TOOR but it seems very rare that it's ever actually used.
Let's be honest neither you nor I have a comprehensive understanding of US law and so perhaps it's more a case of waiting to see what happens.
I do believe though that the difference between kill and murder is partly the cause of debate here.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes it's rarely used across the US but is more commonly used in a few states with Minnesota being one of them, where the victim was killed.
I posted this yesterday.
The difference between third-degree murder and manslaughter often depends on the defendant's state of mind at the time of the killing. In Minnesota, for example, someone can be convicted of manslaughter in the second degree if they knew they were unreasonably risking someone else's life and took that chance. This is different from third-degree murder, where the person must act with a depraved mind and malice (wanton disregard for human life).
First-degree manslaughter — also called heat-of-passion manslaughter, or voluntary manslaughter — occurs when someone intentionally kills another person in the heat of the moment. Generally, they must have been strongly provoked in the moment and not have had time to cool off. Unlike third-degree murder, there is intent to kill, but it is assumed a reasonable person may have lost control of their emotions when similarly provoked.
Involuntary manslaughter, on the other hand, is the least serious of the charges (though still serious) because the killing was unintentional, and possibly accidental, but caused by the defendant's reckless behavior, such as drunken driving or DUI.
Defenses Against a Third-Degree Murder Charge
Defenses to a third-degree murder charge might include:
Innocence ("It wasn't me."
Insanity ("I was mentally impaired and didn't understand what I was doing."
Self-defense ("I was protecting myself from immediate and serious harm."
Defense of others ("I was protecting others from serious harm."
Exercise of duty ("I am a public officer who killed without unlawful intent, recklessness, or negligence.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Are those defences against third degree murder charges, or excuses when Shaaggy’s girlfriend catches him with another woman?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Scooby doo
Page 15 of 15
11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15