Yeah, I think I know the difference between a hardened criminal and somebody who just screwed up. But the problem --at least with the murder statutes -- is that the law in Louisiana treats them just the same. And punishment for either first or second degree murder is either death (1st, if the state elects) or life in prison "without the possibility of probation, parole or suspension of sentence." In short, in Louisiana, life means life. There are no two ways about it. And I think over the next 10 or so years, as the lifer population grows older with many more expensive health care problems, parole may become possible for some simply to shift the economic burden. To be fair, in the case I'm talking about, my client was no Boy Scout but the vast majority of his trouble happened in his younger days. And the DA did offer a reduction to manslaughter, but with consecutive 40 year sentences, and he wouldn't budge. That was the equivalent of a life sentence for my guy. This was a trial where the State offered 109 pieces of evidence, had 10 or 12 people testify -- including two forensic examiners, a coroner and an FBI agent who was an expert in telecommunications -- and my defense was "What puts my client at the scene?" The consistent answer to that was, "Nothing." No murder weapon, no gunshot residue test, no blood on my client's clothes or in his car, no fingerprints or DNA in the house, no DNA in his car. Nothing. And the jury convicted by an 11-1 count. (Yes, in Louisiana, 12 person juries don't have to be unanimous.) I like your reference to that joke I told in a now extinct Forum. Oh, and @uscvball this post applies to your points too.
Here is where I differ, the ones with the right to justice is society--every damn one of us. Victims and their families are often interested in revenge and retribution. Judges have a tough job finding the proper balance here.
Society certainly has a share of it but the victims and their families were directly impacted and IMO, deserve more of a say. There's a reason we don't carry out public death penalties or invite the public in general to make victim impact statements, or sometimes consider the family's wishes in determining the appropriate charge or sentence. Let's face it, if a criminal gets let out and THEY have a desire for revenge and retribution, they are going after family and people who likely testified against them from an impact point of view. And I agree about judges being able to find balance.
I read about a case yesterday. An 18 year old kid from Lafayette caught some younger kids about 15 fooling around with his truck. He said he thought they were breaking into the truck and when the kids fled in their own truck he fired his pistol in their direction. The 18 year old said he was trying to shoot out the taillights but who knows if that is true. The offshoot is that all three younger boys were hit and one of them died. Now the 18 year old is charged with first degree murder. He was stupid and he should be punished for what he did but I just don't see first degree. The DA is not seeking the death penalty but I don't think he should have to spend his whole life in prison either. I can't say what I think might be fair but certainly not life.
Anytime you shoot at someone in the back it is intentional murder including shooting at a getaway car. They are not a threat if they are running away. Even the police don't shoot in such circumstances.
It ain't manslaughter, amigo. That's a killing that would be 1st or 2nd degree but is committed in the heat of passion. Negligent homicide maybe if the jury can be convinced that he didn't have the intent to kill or cause great bodily harm but was grossly negligent.
While I generally agree that the victims or their families have a right to justice there is another case in the court system right now where I have sympathy for the defendent. 20 years ago a 19 year old kid caused an automobile wreck that killed an infant in the other vehicle. He tested .09 on the breathometer which is above the legal limit now but was below the limit at the time. He ended up pleading guilty to I think vehicular manslaughter and was sentenced to serve 2 years in prison. If that sentencing was yesterday or last month I would agree that justice was served and he should do the time. What happened was that he went home and waited for the order to report to prison. Through some error he was never told to report. In the meantime he got a college degree, got a decent job, got married and had a family and has never gotten into a bit of trouble since. The the error was discovered and he was told he had to serve the sentence. One judge granted whatever motion he filed and said he didn't have to do the time. The state appealed that ruling was reversed. Now it is up to a higher court.
