Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

AIBU to think this isn’t murder

271 replies

AldiAisleofCrap · 13/01/2021 21:30

AIBU to think this is really wrong. In America four teenagers break into a house , the home owner fires a gun and one teenager dies. The boys age 17 are charged with murder and sentenced to 55 years in prison.
The judge said done one has to be held responsible but surely the teen who is dead is responsible for his own actions.

OP posts:
SinisterBumFacedCat · 14/01/2021 00:24

...for which they didn’t actually pull the trigger.

Not even manslaughter.

LimitIsUp · 14/01/2021 00:26

Must have been murder by telekinesis

Arobase · 14/01/2021 00:29

"Some 46 states in the union have some form of felony murder rule on their statute books. Of those, 11 states unambiguously allow for individuals who commit a felony that ends in a death to be charged with murder even when they were the victims, rather than the agents, of the killing

That's really odd logic. On that basis, if a burglar is wounded by a homeowner, the burglar should be charged with the US equivalent of assault and GBH as if he had attacked himself.

Staffy1 · 14/01/2021 00:35

@Aloethere

I actually commend the US for allowing their citizens to feel safe because they can defend themselves in their own homes.

Seriously? Would you really kill someone over a wallet or a laptop? How many burglaries here end up with them killing the home owner? They aren't interested in hurting you, they just want your stuff. I'm not saying that is ok but I am saying it isn't a crime that should be punishable by death.

How do you know the home owner wasn't being threatened. If you had four people break into your home would you stand around waiting to see if they were violent or not?
GypsyLee · 14/01/2021 00:37

I can see the logic of having to be responsible, but not murder and maybe 3 years with treatment if necessary.

LimitIsUp · 14/01/2021 00:38

If you had four people break into your home would you stand around and wait to see if they were violent or not...

Nope, I'd run for it (on the basis that they might be violent)

NiceGerbil · 14/01/2021 00:41

What?

What??!!!

I'm flabbergasted. That's just. What?????

55 years?

Were they black by any chance. Only read about 1/3 of the thread.

Fucking hell.

Agree with a pp who said USA system for prison is fucked. You don't have to pay people for work in USA prison. A crazy amount of their economy comes from stuff produced in prisons. They have a massive rate of incarceration. Privatisation etc means it pays to put people in prison as well. Black people, black men. Who get really long terms for trivial stuff. That white people don't get.

Whole thing is fucked tbh. Look it up.

And yes it's nuts to put a17yo in prison for 55 years for murder when they didn't murder anyone.

Fucks sake.

BluebellsGreenbells · 14/01/2021 00:42

People who want to commit crimes should think about it in advance. They don't have to do it

I would think that anyone involved in crime doesn’t actually want to commit crimes.

Would I steal food if my children were hungry, of coarse I would! And so would you, crime takes many forms, dealing drugs, prostitution, theft.

Now add in lack of education, lack of opportunities, lack of self worth, I’ll health, addiction. Poverty breeds poverty, it’s a downward spiral of desperation.

Im not agreeing with the crime, but there will be factors that lead too it. These boys knew the risks and decided it was worth it.

SchrodingersImmigrant · 14/01/2021 00:43

@SinisterBumFacedCat

...for which they didn’t actually pull the trigger.

Not even manslaughter.

Well that's what we think, but their legal system said it's murder. Hence, the sentence is more than if they raped someone 🤷🏻
DifficultBloodyWoman · 14/01/2021 00:43

Were they black by any chance. Only read about 1/3 of the thread.

They were white.

NiceGerbil · 14/01/2021 00:46

Why not do him for breaking and entering/ burglary. On a house that had someone in it.

That's a crime. Obv.

10 years?

55 years is silly. Saying he committed a murder is silly.

If I go out with a mate and we get quite pissed. And I have said let's go back with these nice chaps and she says ok and one rapes her. Am I guilty of getting her drunk and raping her? There is no logic there and it undermines the crime/s .

NiceGerbil · 14/01/2021 00:47

Thanks for the info, difficult.

XDownwiththissortofthingX · 14/01/2021 00:51

I don't see the public interest in charging anyone with anything in this case, but it's the States, where things frequently make no sense whatsoever.

ItsGoingTibiaK · 14/01/2021 00:51

@MustardMitt

I listened to a podcast recently, it was about a case where a police car sped through an intersection, killing a woman in her car. The man they were chasing was charged with her murder.

Ridiculously, they’d pulled him over minutes before and ascertained that he was not guilty (a pissed off friend had reported him for theft). The guy didn’t even know he was being chased until the accident happened - and it happened before the first officer who pulled him over didn’t update the report.

There is so fucking much about US law and order that is just nonsensical. I don’t think we’re the pinnacle of justice or anything, but the stuff that comes out of America is horrifying.

It was this one. Brilliant podcast series.

podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/episode-150-76th-and-yates/id809264944

Changi · 14/01/2021 00:52

Thats the law in US

That's the law in Illinois, not necessarily anywhere else in the US.

Although I wouldn't be surprised if it is.

ItsGoingTibiaK · 14/01/2021 00:52

Link didn't go to the specific episode. It's episode 150.

Guylan · 14/01/2021 00:58

now the streets are 4x safer than they were before.

Grannyinapram, thankfully, the federal court had a less ruthless attitude and overturned the murder convictions, the sentences were reduced and now they have been released.

www.abc57.com/news/elkhart-4-life-after-lockup-blake-layman-one-year-later

PrincessFiorimonde · 14/01/2021 00:59

I am absolutely amazed that there are people who think a 55 -year sentence is appropriate in these circumstances.

DifficultBloodyWoman · 14/01/2021 01:01

@XDownwiththissortofthingX

I don't see the public interest in charging anyone with anything in this case, but it's the States, where things frequently make no sense whatsoever.
The US is much more decentralized and localized than the UK. Because of that it, it could be deemed to be in the public interest of one teeny, tiny community rather than the whole country.

Also, it is locally elected officials who would make the decision to prosecute or not and I am certain that has an effect.

Likewise, if you google the Brock Turner case, the judge was eventually recalled by the public because of the outrage at the ridiculously lenient sentencing in that case.

DifficultBloodyWoman · 14/01/2021 01:07

@DifficultBloodyWoman

Were they black by any chance. Only read about 1/3 of the thread.

They were white.

Correcting my previous post.

The guy in the link posted was white however the group was mixed - black, white and Latino.

Also, 5 young men broke in, not 4. They were aged from 16-21.

saltinesandcoffeecups · 14/01/2021 01:14

@Gwenhwyfar

"On the other hand I can’t really get worked up about scumbags who break into people’s houses - they destroy people’s lives."

A burglary destroys someone's life? Compared to murder?
The punishment for burglary should not be death.
People should be allowed to defend themselves of course, but not property.

They have a lot of silly things like this in the US. The death penalty of course, then the three-strikes law meaning people can get life imprisonment for stealing socks.

Catching up on the thread in the meantime a question....

How would you determine if someone breaking into your house was there to burgle you or kill you?

In most cases the decision is made in a split second to shoot or not shoot. And the presumption is often ‘if someone breaks into the home while I am in in it, I have reasonable evidence that I am in danger. Therefore I can act in a reasonable way and defend myself’.

In other words... if someone breaks in to my house while I’m away... most likely they want my stuff... if they break in while I’m home they want to do me harm. IMO, that’s a generally reasonable conclusion.

WhenPidgeonsCry · 14/01/2021 01:22

The USA's criminal justice system, like most of its institutions, is fucked up and stupid.

NiceGerbil · 14/01/2021 01:25

Yes but that's not the point.

It's not about whether the homeowner should be charged (he wasn't).

It's about whether one or more of the group who broke in should be charged with murder when it was the homeowner who killed one of them.

I think that's bonkers. Burglery/ breaking and entering carries enough time surely. It's not trivial.

Being charged and convicted of a murder under these circs is mad.

gluteustothemaximus · 14/01/2021 01:31

5 people break into your house, all bets are off.

If they have a law about felony murder, then that's the law. If they hadn't broken in, no felony, no murder. Very simple. But they did. And now one is dead.

Harsh, yes, but better than the stupid arsed laws in this country and the lenient sentences.

NiceGerbil · 14/01/2021 01:32

Stupid arsed?

Do you mean stupid assed?

Interesting turn off phrase.