[BFritz]

Say someone pushes someone into the street and right before they get hit by a car, someone pushes them out of the way, gets hit by the car, and dies. Since the person who pushed the first person caused the person to need to jump out and save the other person, could they be charged with manslaughter or murder?

[ComfortEagle]

There is an old Latin term used in the law that is called “mens rea.” Mens rea means “guilty mind” and is a concept present in most criminal laws that distinguishes between an accidental event and an intentional act, even if they both result in the same harm caused to someone’s life, person or property.

For example, a defendant who is on trial for murder must be shown to have not only caused the death of another, but also shown to have intended to commit an unlawful act.

Recklessness is also a mens rea. For example, if a defendant was driving at high speeds through a residential neighborhood and a death occurs as a result, that criminal recklessness is sufficient recklessness for a charge of manslaughter.

IMO, your situation above would be considered manslaughter. Even though he did not intend to cause harm to the person who died, his reckless actions are enough to find him guilty of manslaughter.

[Panther Thunder]

Then what about attemtped murder for the guy he pushed who got pushed out of the way?

[ComfortEagle]

Then what about attemtped murder for the guy he pushed who got pushed out of the way?

Huh? :confused:

[ronald_reagan]

There is an old Latin term used in the law that is called “mens rea.” Mens rea means “guilty mind” and is a concept present in most criminal laws that distinguishes between an accidental event and an intentional act, even if they both result in the same harm caused to someone’s life, person or property.

For example, a defendant who is on trial for murder must be shown to have not only caused the death of another, but also shown to have intended to commit an unlawful act.

Recklessness is also a mens rea. For example, if a defendant was driving at high speeds through a residential neighborhood and a death occurs as a result, that criminal recklessness is sufficient recklessness for a charge of manslaughter.

IMO, your situation above would be considered manslaughter. Even though he did not intend to cause harm to the person who died, his reckless actions are enough to find him guilty of manslaughter.

While you're on the right thought process... its still not totally accurate.

What would probably happen is that the person would be charged with 1st degree murder. This would fall under the felony murder clause. When a crime is committed, leading to the death of someone.. its almost always murder.. even if its not the original victim, or even its not intentional. Providing alcohol to a minor, who later dies, is an example of this.

Murder doesn't always have to have intent to kill. While manslaughter isn't always 'accidental'.

If me and a friend were robbing a house together, and he ended up murdering the tenent, I can and most likely will be charged with murder, because during the commission of a crime.. someone lost their life.

It also depends on the politics of the day as well. Sometimes a drunk driver is charged with murder when he wrecks and kills a passenger... while another may be charged with manslaughter, and sometimes... nothing at all.

The correct charge would be attempted murder, and 1st degree felony murder in the question at hand.

[thecavemaster]

Would depend on the prosecutor, record of the "defendent"... that kind of stuff... criminal justice system is a labyrinth of "what if's" and "under what conditions" and... Ray Larson? It's a death penalty case.

[Panther Thunder]

Huh? :confused:

the dude who originally pushed the first guy.

[vundy33]

Yes Manslaughter.

[ronald_reagan]

Yes Manslaughter.

I hate to call you out, as we typically agree on political matters....

But when you intend to kill someone, and cause the death of another... its almost always murder. Its the felony murder clause that I spoke of.

Further, if you are committing any crime and death occurs you can be charged with 2nd+ degree murder.

The former, however, is a 1st degree offense. Death was intended from the very beginning.

The latter, would be..... If you and I robbed a bank, and you ended up shooting someone... I too would be charged with murder.

[vundy33]

Your right...the part about the bank and your partner getting charged with murder if you killed someone is a crock though...

[ronald_reagan]

Your right...the part about the bank and your partner getting charged with murder if you killed someone is a crock though...

It may be a crock... but its how that the felony murder clause works.

[Batpuff]

There is 9 different charges of Murder.
Family (gun)
Family ( ID weapon)
Non- Family (Gun)
Non - Family ID weapon
Public Official gun
Public Official ID weapon
Police Officer Gun
Police Officer ID weapon
And none of the above Homicide

[ronald_reagan]

There is 9 different charges of Murder.
Family (gun)
Family ( ID weapon)
Non- Family (Gun)
Non - Family ID weapon
Public Official gun
Public Official ID weapon
Police Officer Gun
Police Officer ID weapon
And none of the above Homicide

What does that have to do with it? :confused:

[Batpuff]

1. A person is guilty of murder when:
A. With the intent to cause the death of another person, he causes the death of such person or of a third person. Except that in any prosecution a person shall not be guilty under the subsection if he acted under the influence of extreme emotional disturbance for which there was a reasonable explanation of excuse, the reasonableness of which is to be determined from the viewpoint of a person in the defendents situation under the circumstances as the defendant believed them to be. However nothing contained in this section shall constitute a defense to a prosecution for a preclude of conviction of manslaughter in the first degree or any other crime: or (b) including but not limited to the operation of a motor veh. under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to human life, he wantonly engages in conduct which creates a grave risk of death and thereby causes death to another person.

[Batpuff]

First Degree Manslaughter
A person is guilty when:
With the intent to cause serious physical injury to another person he causes the death of such person or of a third person: or
With intent to cause death of another person he causes the death of such person of a third person under the influence of extreme emotional disturbance

[ronald_reagan]

felony murder doctrine n. a rule of criminal statutes that any death which occurs during the commission of a felony is first degree murder, and all participants in that felony or attempted felony can be charged with and found guilty of murder. A typical example is a robbery involving more than one criminal, in which one of them shoots, beats to death or runs over a store clerk, killing the clerk. Even if the death were accidental, all of the participants can be found guilty of felony murder, including those who did no harm, had no gun, and/or did not intend to hurt anyone. In a bizarre situation, if one of the hold-up men or women is killed, his fellow robbers can be charged with murder.

-----------------

This is a clear act of felony murder. (different than regular murder).

The crime committed is attempted murder. This is a felony. A death resulted because of the felony committed. The suspect would be charged for both crimes under the felony murder doctrine/clause. This is no longer debateable and is settled.

[Batpuff]

second degree manslaughter
A person is guilty when he wantonly causes the death of another person, including but not limited to, situations where the death results from the persons
Operation of a motor veh.
Leaving a child under age of 8 in a motor veh under circumstances which manifest an extreme indifference to human life and which create a grave risk of death to the child, thereby causing the death of said child

[Batpuff]

Reckless Homicide
A person is guilty when with recklessness he causes the death of another person.

[ronald_reagan]

The state of Kentucky does not have felony murder, however the majority of the states do.

[ronald_reagan]

Reckless Homicide
A person is guilty when with recklessness he causes the death of another person.

So this would be the charge that it would be.

How can you read the felony murder doctrine, and then say that it'd be reckless homicide?

or did you read it?

:confused:

here it is again:

felony murder doctrine n. a rule of criminal statutes that any death which occurs during the commission of a felony is first degree murder, and all participants in that felony or attempted felony can be charged with and found guilty of murder. A typical example is a robbery involving more than one criminal, in which one of them shoots, beats to death or runs over a store clerk, killing the clerk. Even if the death were accidental, all of the participants can be found guilty of felony murder, including those who did no harm, had no gun, and/or did not intend to hurt anyone. In a bizarre situation, if one of the hold-up men or women is killed, his fellow robbers can be charged with murder.

the FELONY committed was attempted murder. A death occurred during the commission of this FELONY. Thus the charge should typically be FELONY murder. What is so hard to understand about that?
\

[Batpuff]

felony murder doctrine n. a rule of criminal statutes that any death which occurs during the commission of a felony is first degree murder, and all participants in that felony or attempted felony can be charged with and found guilty of murder. A typical example is a robbery involving more than one criminal, in which one of them shoots, beats to death or runs over a store clerk, killing the clerk. Even if the death were accidental, all of the participants can be found guilty of felony murder, including those who did no harm, had no gun, and/or did not intend to hurt anyone. In a bizarre situation, if one of the hold-up men or women is killed, his fellow robbers can be charged with murder.

-----------------

This is a clear act of felony murder. (different than regular murder).

The crime committed is attempted murder. This is a felony. A death resulted because of the felony committed. The suspect would be charged for both crimes under the felony murder doctrine/clause. This is no longer debateable and is settled.

What gives you the right to say that it is no longer debateable and is settled, Thats what this is for to talk about issues. And for your information it determined by how the Attorney looks at it and then what the Grand Jury Decides to vote on.

[Batpuff]

How can you read the felony murder doctrine, and then say that it'd be reckless homicide?

or did you read it?

:confused:

here it is again:

felony murder doctrine n. a rule of criminal statutes that any death which occurs during the commission of a felony is first degree murder, and all participants in that felony or attempted felony can be charged with and found guilty of murder. A typical example is a robbery involving more than one criminal, in which one of them shoots, beats to death or runs over a store clerk, killing the clerk. Even if the death were accidental, all of the participants can be found guilty of felony murder, including those who did no harm, had no gun, and/or did not intend to hurt anyone. In a bizarre situation, if one of the hold-up men or women is killed, his fellow robbers can be charged with murder.

the FELONY committed was attempted murder. A death occurred during the commission of this FELONY. Thus the charge should typically be FELONY murder. What is so hard to understand about that?
\

Well to start with I have had the undo fortune to have to take cases like this to the grand jury and know that its not always what is written in black and white, but how some that has no clue about the laws see it in there eyes.

[ronald_reagan]

And for your information it determined by how the Attorney looks at it and then what the Grand Jury Decides to vote on.

A little late for the party aren't ya?

It also depends on the politics of the day as well.

Would depend on the prosecutor, record of the "defendent"... that kind of stuff... criminal justice system is a labyrinth of "what if's" and "under what conditions" and... Ray Larson? It's a death penalty case.

There may be NO charge whatsoever if the prosecuter decides not to press charges, or a grand jury doesn't agree.

However, the CORRECT charge in the sense of the written law is that of Felony Murder. This isn't debateable. What is debateable is, will they charge him with it? Plea deals, easier charges to convict, etc....

[Batpuff]

Well to start with I have had the undo fortune to have to take cases like this to the grand jury and know that its not always what is written in black and white, but how some that has no clue about the laws see it in there eyes.

Also there isnt enough evidence to show that he was committing a felony. All that was mention was he was pushed, That is not a felony.

[ronald_reagan]

Well to start with I have had the undo fortune to have to take cases like this to the grand jury and know that its not always what is written in black and white, but how some that has no clue about the laws see it in there eyes.

Which is why you'd never see it as felony murder... considering Kentucky doesn't have that law.

[ronald_reagan]

Also there isnt enough evidence to show that he was committing a felony. All that was mention was he was pushed, That is not a felony.

Its under the assumption by the way the question was asked, that he was attempting harm or death by pushing them in front of a car. That is something that the thread started could clear up. However, if the assumption is true, and it very well may not be... felony murder would typically apply.

[Batpuff]

A little late for the party aren't ya?





There may be NO charge whatsoever if the prosecuter decides not to press charges, or a grand jury doesn't agree.

However, the CORRECT charge in the sense of the written law is that of Felony Murder. This isn't debateable. What is debateable is, will they charge him with it? Plea deals, easier charges to convict, etc....

Show me where another act that was a Felony was taking place at the time of the death. There was no other crime that was taking place other then being pushed. That is just assault 4th.

[Batpuff]

And by the way I agree if there was a felony being committed at the time of death then it would be Murder.

[ronald_reagan]

Show me where another act that was a Felony was taking place at the time of the death. There was no other crime that was taking place other then being pushed. That is just assault 4th.

Its not event assault in the 4th based on the 'evidence' that you don't see. Pushing a friend on the sidewalk isn't exactly a crime.

The basis of my point is on the assumption that the suspect meant to kill the person he pushed. If thats not the correct assumption, then I'm wrong. Its no big deal.

[ronald_reagan]

Show me where another act that was a Felony was taking place at the time of the death. There was no other crime that was taking place other then being pushed. That is just assault 4th.

And assuming that it was assualt in the 4th, it would typically be misdemeanor manslaughter. Not manslaughter.

Misdemeanor manslaughter requires that a non-felony crime be committed that safeguards human life, and death occurred as a result.