History Main / FelonyMurder

21st Jun '16 10:16:39 PM bwburke94
Is there an issue? Send a Message


'''Contains spoilers, by definition.'''

to:

'''Contains spoilers, by definition.'''This is a death trope. Here there be spoilers.'''



* In ''Peter Parker, The Spectacular SpiderMan'', the second Prowler found himself in a terrible situation when he tried burgling a penthouse and a guard tried tackling him while the Prowler was going over the side to escape. As it happens, the combined momentum led to the guard being accidentally thrown off and he falls to his death while the Prowler could only watch helplessly clinging to the building wall. After that, the Prowler became even more dependent on his employer, Belladonna, considering the accident would still be considered a "murder in commission of a felony." The fact that the police suspect SpiderMan did it is no help considering the Prowler knows that the SuperHero will be looking for him to clear his name.

to:

* In ''Peter Parker, The Spectacular SpiderMan'', the second Prowler found himself in a terrible situation when he tried burgling a penthouse and a guard tried tackling him while the Prowler was going over the side to escape. As it happens, the combined momentum led to the guard being accidentally thrown off and he falls to his death while the Prowler could only watch helplessly clinging to the building wall. After that, the Prowler became even more dependent on his employer, Belladonna, considering the accident would still be considered a "murder in commission of a felony." The fact that the police suspect SpiderMan Spider-Man did it is no help considering the Prowler knows that the SuperHero will be looking for him to clear his name.
19th Nov '15 8:44:08 PM karstovich2
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* Giuseppe Zangara attempted to assassinate UsefulNotes/FranklinDRoosevelt a few weeks before his inauguration, but actually ended up severely wounding (among others) Anton Cermak, the Mayor of Chicago who was accompanying Roosevelt on his trip to Florida. Cermak subsequently died as the result of a screw-up on the part of the doctors operating on him, but Zangara was hit with a first degree murder charge anyway, as threatening (let alone trying to assassinate) the President or President-elect is a felony in its own right, regardless of the outcome. On top of that, Florida law incorporated the rule of "transferred intent," meaning that even if Zangara technically didn't mean to kill Cermak, he was treated he same as if he'd successfully killed Roosevelt. Not that Zangara seemed to care about any of the niceties of this, as he pleaded guilty to all the charges, and was subsequently executed via the electric chair just a few weeks later.

to:

* Giuseppe Zangara attempted to assassinate UsefulNotes/FranklinDRoosevelt a few weeks before his inauguration, but actually ended up severely wounding (among others) Anton Cermak, the Mayor of Chicago who was accompanying Roosevelt on his trip to Florida. Cermak subsequently died as the result of a screw-up on the part of the doctors operating on him, but Zangara was hit with a first degree murder charge anyway, as threatening (let alone trying to assassinate) the President or President-elect is a felony in its own right, regardless of the outcome. On top of that, Florida law incorporated the rule of "transferred intent," meaning that even if Zangara technically didn't mean to kill Cermak, he was treated he same as if he'd successfully killed Roosevelt. [[note]]This sets aside the interesting--and probably untrue, but not ''entirely'' impossible--ConspiracyTheory that Cermak was the actual target of the attack; these theories generally rest on the (actually pretty possible) alleged ties Zangara had to UsefulNotes/TheMafia, as Cermak had run on an anti-corruption platform with a focus on cleaning up Mob influence in Chicago, and naturally the Mob did not like him. This is ''probably'' not what happened, but it makes for an interesting story nonetheless.[[/note]] Not that Zangara seemed to care about any of the niceties of this, as he pleaded guilty to all the charges, and was subsequently executed via the electric chair just a few weeks later.
10th Oct '15 12:53:28 PM nombretomado
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* Used in an issue of ''{{Nightwing}}'', complete with a woman dropping dead of a heart attack during a robbery.

to:

* Used in an issue of ''{{Nightwing}}'', ''ComicBook/{{Nightwing}}'', complete with a woman dropping dead of a heart attack during a robbery.
3rd Sep '15 4:10:02 PM OlfinBedwere
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

* Giuseppe Zangara attempted to assassinate UsefulNotes/FranklinDRoosevelt a few weeks before his inauguration, but actually ended up severely wounding (among others) Anton Cermak, the Mayor of Chicago who was accompanying Roosevelt on his trip to Florida. Cermak subsequently died as the result of a screw-up on the part of the doctors operating on him, but Zangara was hit with a first degree murder charge anyway, as threatening (let alone trying to assassinate) the President or President-elect is a felony in its own right, regardless of the outcome. On top of that, Florida law incorporated the rule of "transferred intent," meaning that even if Zangara technically didn't mean to kill Cermak, he was treated he same as if he'd successfully killed Roosevelt. Not that Zangara seemed to care about any of the niceties of this, as he pleaded guilty to all the charges, and was subsequently executed via the electric chair just a few weeks later.
9th Jul '15 9:50:38 PM Scorpion451
Is there an issue? Send a Message


Note that this rule is the subject of great controversy in America. Because ''any'' felony can serve as the basis for a felony-murder conviction, it can have some odd consequences. The drafters of the [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model_Penal_Code Model Penal Code]] noted that because it is a felony in most states to sell a visibly drunk individual alcohol, if the drunk drinks himself to death or crashes his car and kills himself or other people, the liquor store shopkeeper or bartender who gave the drunk the booze might be criminally liable for murder under the traditional felony-murder rule. Obviously such a result is repulsive; it becomes more so when you realize that the cases that this is ''supposed'' to cover--such as the classic armed-robbery scenario--could easily get murder convictions on the grounds of "depraved indifference" (American courts generally accept that when you act recklessly in a manner where it is not merely possible but likely that you are going to kill someone, it's murder by the rule of "depraved/extreme indifference to human life", or more poetically "depraved-heart murder"). Opponents of the rule (particularly defense attorneys) describe it as a prosecutor's easy way out, used not to [[JusticeByOtherLegalMeans get proper convictions when the facts are difficult]] but rather to take a shortcut when the facts are easy and a conviction is assured on other legal grounds; even legal scholars who don't advocate for its abolition are quite wary of it. As a result of this wariness, the MPC (adopted by somewhere in the ballpark of 10-20 states) includes a very narrow version of the rule; one state (New Mexico) has modified it in a manner that makes it more or less useless; and three states have abolished it entirely (Hawaii and Kentucky by legislative enactment, Michigan by judicial decision).[[note]]Michigan's felony-murder rule was judicial in origin. Michigan's common law of crimes is very well developed--decisions of the Michigan Supreme Court are often regarded as highly persuasive precedent in criminal cases in other states--and its legislature codified far less of the criminal law than is usual. To give you an idea, Jack Kevorkian, a physician infamous for his assisted suicide work in Detroit's northern suburbs, was tried once on ''common law'' murder charges, a highly unusual occurrence in the United States, but perfectly normal in Michigan--Michigan's murder rule is common law (that is, judge-made). Since Michigan's murder rule was judge-made, so was its felony-murder rule when it existed, and so the judges who created it were perfectly capable of eliminating it. Or more accurately, the judges determined that felony-murder had been "swallowed" (i.e. made redundant by) murder by depraved indifference to human life: that is, they bought the argument above about depraved-heart murder.[[/note]]

to:

Note that this rule is the subject of great controversy in America. Because ''any'' felony can serve as the basis for a felony-murder conviction, it can have some odd consequences. The drafters of the [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model_Penal_Code Model Penal Code]] noted that because it is a felony in most states to sell a visibly drunk individual alcohol, if the drunk drinks himself to death or crashes his car and kills himself or other people, the liquor store shopkeeper or bartender who gave the drunk the booze might be criminally liable for murder under the traditional felony-murder rule. Obviously such a result The two sides of the debate both make strong cases on this example:
* The pro-felon-murder contingent argues that declaring the drunk SomebodyElsesProblem lead directly to them ''becoming'' someone else's problem. Had the bartender obeyed the law, the victims would not be dead. They are an AccompliceByInaction.
* The counter argument
is repulsive; that the bartender should not be held responsible for the drunk's actions. Despite the fact that the bartender's failure to act allowed the death to occur, it is ultimately the drunk's actions that lead to the death(s).
It
becomes even more so when you realize that complicated in the cases that this law is ''supposed'' primarily intended to cover--such cover, such as the classic armed-robbery scenario--could easily get scenario. In these cases, it becomes murder convictions on the grounds of "depraved indifference" (American indifference". American courts generally accept that when you act recklessly in a manner where it is not merely possible but likely that you are going to kill someone, it's murder by the rule of "depraved/extreme indifference to human life", or more poetically "depraved-heart murder"). murder". Opponents of the rule (particularly defense attorneys) describe it as a prosecutor's easy way out, used not to [[JusticeByOtherLegalMeans get proper convictions when the facts are difficult]] but rather to take a shortcut when the facts are easy and a conviction is assured on other legal grounds; grounds. Due to this FlameBait status, even legal scholars who don't advocate for its abolition are quite wary of it. As it, and its a result favorite target of this wariness, politicians looking to score points with the defense attorney crowd.

The
MPC (adopted by somewhere in the ballpark of 10-20 states) includes a very narrow version of the rule; one rule. One state (New Mexico) has modified it in a manner that makes it more or less useless; and three useless. Three states have abolished it entirely (Hawaii and Kentucky by legislative enactment, Michigan by judicial decision).[[note]]Michigan's felony-murder rule was judicial in origin. Michigan's common law of crimes is very well developed--decisions of the Michigan Supreme Court are often regarded as highly persuasive precedent in criminal cases in other states--and its legislature codified far less of the criminal law than is usual. To give you an idea, Jack Kevorkian, a physician infamous for his assisted suicide work in Detroit's northern suburbs, was tried once on ''common law'' murder charges, a highly unusual occurrence in the United States, but perfectly normal in Michigan--Michigan's murder rule is common law (that is, judge-made). Since Michigan's murder rule was judge-made, so was its felony-murder rule when it existed, and so the The judges who created it were perfectly capable of eliminating it. Or more accurately, the judges ultimately determined that felony-murder had been "swallowed" (i.e. made redundant by) murder by depraved indifference to human life: that is, they bought the argument above about depraved-heart murder.life.[[/note]]
29th May '15 3:14:02 AM Dravencour
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* [[CaptainObvious Kill]],
* Attempt to kill,

to:

* [[CaptainObvious Kill]],
Kill someone]],
* Attempt to kill,kill someone,
28th Apr '15 11:57:54 AM ScrewySqrl
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* One episode of ''Series/Emergency'' had two bank robbers call in the paramedics when one of their hostages had a heart attack. Probably to prevent these charges from being filed.

to:

* One episode of ''Series/Emergency'' ''{{Series/Emergency}}'' had two bank robbers call in the paramedics when one of their hostages had a heart attack. Probably to prevent these charges from being filed.
28th Apr '15 11:57:18 AM ScrewySqrl
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

* One episode of ''Series/Emergency'' had two bank robbers call in the paramedics when one of their hostages had a heart attack. Probably to prevent these charges from being filed.
13th Apr '15 9:12:26 AM mlsmithca
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* The case that led to the end of FelonyMurder (or "constructive malice") in British law was that of Derek Bentley and Christopher Craig in 1952. Bentley, 19, was severely mentally disabled. Craig was 16. When breaking into a warehouse one night, Craig was carrying a gun. Confronted by the police, Bentley (while already under arrest) allegedly said "Let him have it, Chris!" Craig then shot dead a police officer. The prosecution claimed this meant to shoot him, which the defense contested of course, but it didn't matter-Bentley was part of the underlying felony, meaning legally he was guilty of the murder as well, even if he ''hadn't'' also urged Craig to do this. Craig was too young to be hanged (it was for 18-year olds and above only) and received "detention at Her Majesty's pleasure", paroled after 10 years. Bentley was hanged. The absurdity of the murderer being spared in place of his mentally disabled partner led to the Homicide Act 1957, abolishing constructive malice and permitting the defense of diminished responsibility (as Bentley was not allowed to utilize)-capital punishment was then mandatory for murder convictions, and this also helped in the campaign against hanging. In 1993, Bentley was retroactively pardoned, and his sentence quashed in 1998. The case was chronicled in a film named after Bentley's ambiguous words-''Let Him Have It.''
* Ryan Holle is one of the most controversial uses of this rule. Ryan let some friends borrow his car when they said they were going to commit a robbery to obtain marujuanna. During the robbery, the ringleader killed a little girl. No one had discussed killing anyone with Ryan, and Ryan was sleeping in his home a mile and a half away at the time the death occurred. It didn't matter, Ryan was still arrested and charged with first degree murder. Despite his claims that he was drunk, wasn't thinking clearly at the time, and thought his friends were joking, Ryan was still put on trial. Ryan was the only one involved with the crime who was offered a plea deal. Since he truly believed he was innocent, Ryan refused the deal. He was later found guilty and sentenced to life without parole. A hearing is currently going on to see if he will be pardoned or granted clemency.
----
<<|CrimeAndPunishmentTropes|>>

<<|UsefulNotes/TheUnitedStates|>>

to:

* The case that led to the end of FelonyMurder (or "constructive malice") in British law was that of Derek Bentley and Christopher Craig in 1952. Bentley, 19, was severely mentally disabled. Craig was 16. When breaking into a warehouse one night, Craig was carrying a gun. Confronted by the police, Bentley (while already under arrest) allegedly said "Let him have it, Chris!" Craig then shot dead a police officer. The prosecution claimed this meant to shoot him, which the defense contested of course, but it didn't matter-Bentley matter - Bentley was part of the underlying felony, meaning legally he was guilty of the murder as well, even if he ''hadn't'' also urged Craig to do this. Craig was too young to be hanged (it was for 18-year olds and above only) and received "detention at Her Majesty's pleasure", paroled after 10 years. Bentley was hanged. The absurdity of the murderer being spared in place of his mentally disabled partner led to the Homicide Act 1957, abolishing constructive malice and permitting the defense of diminished responsibility (as Bentley was not allowed to utilize)-capital utilize) - capital punishment was then mandatory for murder convictions, and this also helped in the campaign against hanging. In 1993, Bentley was retroactively pardoned, and his sentence quashed in 1998. The case was chronicled in a film named after Bentley's ambiguous words-''Let words - ''Let Him Have It.''
* Ryan Holle is one of the most controversial uses of this rule. Ryan let some friends borrow his car when they said they were going to commit a robbery to obtain marujuanna.marijuana. During the robbery, the ringleader killed a little girl. No one had discussed killing anyone with Ryan, and Ryan was sleeping in his home a mile and a half away at the time the death occurred. It didn't matter, Ryan was still arrested and charged with first degree murder. Despite his claims that he was drunk, wasn't thinking clearly at the time, and thought his friends were joking, Ryan was still put on trial. Ryan was the only one involved with the crime who was offered a plea deal. Since he truly believed he was innocent, Ryan refused the deal. He was later found guilty and sentenced to life without parole. A hearing is currently going on to see if he will be pardoned or granted clemency.
----
<<|CrimeAndPunishmentTropes|>>

<<|UsefulNotes/TheUnitedStates|>>
----
11th Apr '15 1:07:42 AM bobg
Is there an issue? Send a Message


^ Ryan Holle is one of the most controversial uses of this rule. Ryan let some friends borrow his car when they said they were going to commit a robbery to obtain marujuanna. During the robbery, the ringleader killed a little girl. No one had discussed killing anyone with Ryan, and Ryan was sleeping in his home a mile and a half away at the time the death occurred. It didn't matter, Ryan was still arrested and charged with first degree murder. Despite his claims that he was drunk, wasn't thinking clearly at the time, and thought his friends were joking, Ryan was still put on trial. Ryan was the only one involved with the crime who was offered a plea deal. Since he truly believed he was innocent, Ryan refused the deal. He was later found guilty and sentenced to life without parole. A hearing is currently going on to see if he will be pardoned or granted clemency.

to:

^ * Ryan Holle is one of the most controversial uses of this rule. Ryan let some friends borrow his car when they said they were going to commit a robbery to obtain marujuanna. During the robbery, the ringleader killed a little girl. No one had discussed killing anyone with Ryan, and Ryan was sleeping in his home a mile and a half away at the time the death occurred. It didn't matter, Ryan was still arrested and charged with first degree murder. Despite his claims that he was drunk, wasn't thinking clearly at the time, and thought his friends were joking, Ryan was still put on trial. Ryan was the only one involved with the crime who was offered a plea deal. Since he truly believed he was innocent, Ryan refused the deal. He was later found guilty and sentenced to life without parole. A hearing is currently going on to see if he will be pardoned or granted clemency.
This list shows the last 10 events of 55. Show all.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=Main.FelonyMurder