Welcome to what 2008 - 2016 was.

This is wrong.

The felony murder RULE says that you can charge people who didn't kill somebody with murder if they were involved in a felony in which somebody was killed while carrying it out. The typical example is the get-away driver for a bank robbery can be charged for the death of a bystander even though he didn't pull the trigger because he was willfully involved. It DOES NOT say that you have to be committing a felony to be charged with murder. That is just asinine.

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Jun 3 2020 07:46pm

He’s only ruining the country bor

"A postmortem nasal swab was taken, which confirmed that Floyd was positive for SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. It is noted that Floyd was known to be positive for COVID-19 on April 3. The postmortem positivity likely reflects asymptomatic but persistent PCR positivity from previous infection, the report said."

Pretty much, but Obama was pretty bland so it didn't even make sense

So much white privilege in this thread. It all must be true!!!


✊🏿

there's no such thing in law as "involved". Do you charge the bank manager who witnessed the murder for felony murder because he was "involved"?
the felony murder rule allows murder charges for those held responsible for the death of someone cause by their commission of a dangerous felony
you have to be committing a felony to be charged with felony murder. If you're not in the commission of a felony, you can't.
Being the gunman isn't a necessity to be charged with a felony. The getaway driver is guilty of a felony just as much as the guy holding the gun, hence permitting that charge

the felony murder rule does say you have to be committing a dangerous felony to be charged with murder, and that's an important legal distinction. You can't be charged with felony murder if someone dies as a consequence of you a misdemeanor. Nor can it be charged in a case where the underlying felony is nonviolent and posed no foreseeable risk of death. If somehow someone died because you committed felony tax fraud, they can't use that just because its a felony.
and again, it has to be a felony separate from the crime itself. If someone was directly responsible for the murder, they can just be charged with murder. If they weren't responsible for the murder and weren't committing a crime, they can't be charged. Duh.

this all makes a whole bunch of sense, shouldn't be that hard to grok.

The issue here is "felony murder" means murder done during another felony (being the getaway driver and being charged with murder even though you didn't kill the bystander).

You can be charged with murder without it being part of another felony, in which case you would just say they were charged with murder, which is itself does fall into the classification of crimes known as felonies. If you were the getaway driver you would be charged with "felony murder", because you were engaged in a felony but didn't commit the killing yourself.

I'm not sure we disagree actually... just that felony murder has a really unfortunate name and makes it hard to talk about lol. If you are talking about the other 3 police I agree that they can't be charged with felony murder.

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Jun 3 2020 09:00pm

The felony murder rule is about the transferred intent and criminal liability. Its not just a description of committing multiple crimes at once or as an accomplice to others- its possible to commit felony murder as a sole perpetrator. The point of the rule is that someone who commits an inherently dangerous felony becomes responsible for the lethal consequences of their actions, even if they weren't intended, even if someone else pulled the trigger- or was shooting at them and missed and hit a bystander. The felony murder rule says that as long as there is a proximate and coherent line of causation between your inherently dangerous felony and someone else's death, you're responsible for it.

An example of a felony murder conviction for one person committing only one crime, would be if an arsonist burns down a building during a riot in minneapolis thinking the building is empty, but someone inside of it burns to death. It wouldn't be first or even second degree direct murder because there's no specific intent to murder, but it can still be felony murder because there's a specific intent to commit arson which a reasonable person would know could endanger lives, and thus be held responsible for it. The underlying felony still exists- arson- but also a murder charge.

There's no way in which the felony murder rule comes into play without an underlying felony. If the murder itself is the underlying crime, then the rule would be redundant. If there's no felony and you didn't intentionally cause their death then its... not murder.

inb4 prosecutor scared of the mob argues successfully they were guilty of felony negligence of some kind and therefore felony murder sticks. what a moonshot that would be.