Whoever, without intent to effect the death of any person, causes the death of another by perpetrating an act eminently dangerous to others and evincing a depraved mind, without regard for human life, is guilty of murder in the third degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 25 years. (From mn.gov) I guess the difference between second and third degree murder in this case would hinge on whether the cop intended to kill George Floyd. I'm not a lawyer but it seems to me that a third degree murder charge would make for a much easier conviction because a second degree murder charge would surely require that the prosecution prove the cop intended to kill Floyd. Taking away that burden of proof while still allowing for 25 years in jail would seem to me to make more sense, unless the primary goal is posturing.
Which is essentially the same as voluntary manslaughter... i.e., reckless endangerment or careless disregard that led to a homicide. 2nd degree caries a must longer prison term. Of course, each state does it differently.
You mentioned involuntary manslaughter earlier - what exactly is that? If I recall the difference in MN is that third degree murder carries a sentence up to 25 years and second degree murder raises that to 40 years. Chances are an ex-cop in a high security prison is going to have a pretty rough time of it however long or short the sentence.
involuntary manslaughter is like vehicular homicide.... you are drag racing, have a wreck, and your passenger gets killed.
Right, so a consequence of something arguably reckless but without any specific intent to harm anyone?
However, if you kill someone while driving drunk, it is considered voluntary manslaughter, because you put yourself in a disabled condition... Criminal law is nuts... which is why I stay out of that arena.
Sounds like our fuhrer's idea of rational legislation where shutting down businesses is concerned. I can stand in line at Walmart to buy a pair of shoes but can't go to the local shoe store and have a good chance of being the only customer in there. Who said it ever had to make sense? If it made sense I guess a lot fewer people would get rich from it...
I had a couple of friends ask me this morning what the Christian response to the current social unrest and upheaval both in the US and world wide should be. My response: 1 Peter 3:15-16: Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander.
Original charge was third degree murder and and the three other officers on scene weren't charged. Now, possibly due to political compulsions, Charge has been upgraded to second degree Murder and the three other officers on scene during the incidence have been charged with aiding and abetting second-degree murder. Second-degree murder and aiding and abetting second-degree murder are punishable by up to 40 years in prison. Manslaughter and aiding and abetting manslaughter are punishable by up to 10 years in prison.
It seems to me that a second degree murder charge is more likely to result in acquittal, simply because it requires an intent to kill the victim. I don't see how a jury could conclude that kneeling on a handcuffed man's neck for an extended period is anything other than reckless and likely to endanger their life. Convincing that same jury that the cop intended to kill the victim seems like an area that would be prone to more doubt. Does the law allow the jury to acquit on a more serious charge but convict on a lesser charge?
Some is just reaction to the same idiocy from the left. Some is idiots on the right not understanding how easily they are played by agents provocateur from the left. Some is true far right ideologues that are essentially separatists from the get-go. You've got some of all of the above in your area with the American Redoubt movement.
Some states permit charging the highest degree offense and included in that charge are "all lesser crimes." Some jurisdictions make the prosecution pick their charge, and if they miss, they don't get to go to a lesser.
That figures. I think in England if your charge doesn't stick the defendant walks so prosecutors are perhaps more inclined to accept a plea bargain. It seems to be particularly unfriendly to defendants to include "all lesser crimes" in a charge - if the prosecutors don't have to figure out the most serious charge that is likely to stick does anything exist to stop them pushing for ever-harsher charges just because they can?
True, many a right activists are who are just fed up of left bullshit. Pure lunacy of left pushes many to the right fold.
The increment in charge is purely due to political pressure resulting from public outrage on the incident. It was just to encash the outrage. Second degree murder is difficult to stick with a sensible jury. But, the as we see that protests have found takers worldwide and if the momentum of protests/outrage survives till trial, we can't be sure of which way the jury turn.
Sure, you just wonder whether it will actually go the course or whether the cop will make a plea bargain and plead guilty to third degree murder instead, or whether he'll be acquitted and trigger more riots because the Great Unwashed won't be able to tell the difference between an incompetent prosecutor and a racist court. Either way, my guess is that a former cop in prison isn't going to last six months so whether the sentence is 4 years or 40 years will most likely be academic.