View Poll Results: Verdict/Opinion?

Voters
1557. You may not vote on this poll
  • Justifiable

    568 36.48%
  • Unjustifiable

    583 37.44%
  • Would have gone about it differently.

    571 36.67%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 55 of 85 FirstFirst ...
5
45
53
54
55
56
57
65
... LastLast
  1. #1081
    Quote Originally Posted by Jokerfiend View Post
    At this mans emotional state, he will walk.
    Not really a chance of that.

    ---------- Post added 2012-09-11 at 07:32 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Epiphanes View Post
    Given the context of the situation and his proclaimed reason for why he committed the act, in his own eyes he was justified.
    Whether or not he thinks it is justified is quite irrelevant. The "reasonable person" will not find killing someone because they MIGHT have infected to be a reasonable justification, and that's all there is to it. There would be mitigation for being in the heat of the moment, but he's almost certainly going to jail.

  2. #1082
    Quote Originally Posted by semaphore View Post
    Not really a chance of that.

    ---------- Post added 2012-09-11 at 07:32 AM ----------


    Whether or not he thinks it is justified is quite irrelevant. The "reasonable person" will not find killing someone because they MIGHT have infected to be a reasonable justification, and that's all there is to it. There would be mitigation for being in the heat of the moment, but he's almost certainly going to jail.
    Depends on too many things we don't know yet to say. What his defense will be? Will it be a jury trial? Will he have a good lawyer? If Johnie Cochran comes back from the grave and uses the Chewbacca defense, he walks.

  3. #1083
    Quote Originally Posted by semaphore View Post
    Not really a chance of that.
    He will walk with man-slaughter. Not murder. No one is going to convict him of murder, given the circumstances. If he doesn't have a prior background of severely aggressive behavior. This isn't a case of premed. This isn't cold blooded. Man-slaughter with MAYBE 1-2 prison time. My guess is 1 with 5 years probation.

  4. #1084
    Stood in the Fire Spritely's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    TN
    Posts
    390
    The fact that he is un-repentant will mean he will likely see no reduction in sentencing. He would still kill her all over again without it being a snap decision. He acted in a way that he knew would result in her death, with the intent to kill her. Manslaughter is generally reserved for cases where a person snaps and unintentionally kills another person. In those cases the person is usually horrified after seeing the results of their actions and and repentant.

    I'm not saying he definitely won't get charged with manslaughter here, the DA could choose to take it easy on him or may simply give him a plea bargain. Just saying how the law generally is applied.

  5. #1085
    Quote Originally Posted by Spritely View Post
    The fact that he is un-repentant will mean he will likely see no reduction in sentencing. He would still kill her all over again without it being a snap decision. He acted in a way that he knew would result in her death, with the intent to kill her. Manslaughter is generally reserved for cases where a person snaps and unintentionally kills another person. In those cases the person is usually horrified after seeing the results of their actions and and repentant.

    I'm not saying he definitely won't get charged with manslaughter here, the DA could choose to take it easy on him or may simply give him a plea bargain. Just saying how the law generally is applied.
    It doesn't matter how he seems now. What will matter is how good of a show the defense can put on during the trial. Frankly if it is a jury trial, I don't see a jury convicting him of murder.

  6. #1086
    Quote Originally Posted by Jokerfiend View Post
    He will walk with man-slaughter. Not murder. No one is going to convict him of murder, given the circumstances. If he doesn't have a prior background of severely aggressive behavior. This isn't a case of premed. This isn't cold blooded. Man-slaughter with MAYBE 1-2 prison time. My guess is 1 with 5 years probation.
    He first went to the kitchen to get the knife and then come back to stab her to death. That is very arguably indicative of malicious aforethought, which makes it murder. On top of that given that the odds are stacked against him contracting HIV from her, I doubt he'll have too much success in court.

    ---------- Post added 2012-09-11 at 07:43 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by jbombard View Post
    Depends on too many things we don't know yet to say. What his defense will be? Will it be a jury trial? Will he have a good lawyer? If Johnie Cochran comes back from the grave and uses the Chewbacca defense, he walks.
    I won't say he is definitely going away for life, but the chances of him walking is really very low given the known circumstances. Having a defense only goes so far when you confess to murder.

  7. #1087
    Quote Originally Posted by Spritely View Post
    The fact that he is un-repentant will mean he will likely see no reduction in sentencing. He would still kill her all over again without it being a snap decision. He acted in a way that he knew would result in her death, with the intent to kill her. Manslaughter is generally reserved for cases where a person snaps and unintentionally kills another person. In those cases the person is usually horrified after seeing the results of their actions and and repentant.

    I'm not saying he definitely won't get charged with manslaughter here, the DA could choose to take it easy on him or may simply give him a plea bargain. Just saying how the law generally is applied.
    I can give you examples of cases of "murder" after acts of heinous crimes and the person walks. He might not feel sorry for what he did, but that is because he believe it was justified. Rightfully so, IMO. A jury will have to convict. Yet, I don't see them convicting of murder.

  8. #1088
    Quote Originally Posted by semaphore View Post
    He first went to the kitchen to get the knife and then come back to stab her to death. That is very indicative of malicious aforethought, which makes it murder. On top of that given that the odds are stacked against him contracting HIV from her, I doubt he'll have too much success in court.

    ---------- Post added 2012-09-11 at 07:43 AM ----------


    I won't say he is definitely going away for life, but the chances of him walking is really very low given the known circumstances. Having a defense only goes so far when you confess to murder.
    People with far worse cases walk everyday in our current legal system. Not saying it's right. But really it will come down to the trial, his lawyer and the jury selection.

  9. #1089
    Quote Originally Posted by jbombard View Post
    People with far worse cases walk everyday in our current legal system.
    Cite one for every day of the week then...

    I mean, again, I'm not saying he has no chance whatsoever. I'm just pointing out that he isn't likely to get off with a slap on the wrists, and saying "well there are exceptions and statistical outliers" doesn't really change that he has a terrible case on his hands.

  10. #1090
    Stood in the Fire Spritely's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    TN
    Posts
    390
    Quote Originally Posted by Jokerfiend View Post
    I can give you examples of cases of "murder" after acts of heinous crimes and the person walks. He might not feel sorry for what he did, but that is because he believe it was justified. Rightfully so, IMO. A jury will have to convict. Yet, I don't see them convicting of murder.
    One source says he stabbed her twice in the chest, which killed her, and then slit her throat just to make sure she couldn't be saved. I don't care to spend the time to see the full police report.

    In any case, you seem to have an odd definition of "walk". Getting convicted of manslaughter does not mean he walks. He's still convicted of a felony serious enough to make him not be hire-able. Whether he spends 1 year or 10 years or more in jail, his entire life is ruined, HIV positive or not (and he's most likely not). Being convicted is NOT walking.

    That said, I'm going to bed. Having a conversation in this context with someone with an avatar alluding to heroine use is just odd.

  11. #1091
    Quote Originally Posted by semaphore View Post
    He first went to the kitchen to get the knife and then come back to stab her to death. That is very arguably indicative of malicious aforethought, which makes it murder. On top of that given that the odds are stacked against him contracting HIV from her, I doubt he'll have too much success in court.

    ---------- Post added 2012-09-11 at 07:43 AM ----------


    I won't say he is definitely going away for life, but the chances of him walking is really very low given the known circumstances. Having a defense only goes so far when you confess to murder.
    Ok, how far is the kitchen? In my house, I can be in the living room and step to the kitchen in less 5 seconds and grab my Wustuf, which in a block. In a panicked, fear driven, hyper adrenaline state, that would be in a blink of an eye, an action taken without fore-thought.

    Have you ever been that panicked? Have you ever experienced a true emotional state like that? His emotion state at that moment... and even continued state, is something you can't just describe. It's something you can only experience, in a very rare cases. This isn't a usual case.

  12. #1092
    Quote Originally Posted by Jokerfiend View Post
    Ok, how far is the kitchen?
    Doesn't matter. He went out of his way to get a weapon that he used to kill with deliberation. That's malicious aforethought, while the actions demonstrated a clear intent to kill.

    In a panicked, fear driven, hyper adrenaline state
    You make it sound like he was experiencing a home invasion or something. "I have HIV" aren't even fighting words. But regardless, again, his actions showed or can be quite reasonably argued to have shown malicious aforethought as well as deadly intent. He may plea down to manslaughter but he's not walking without some colossal upset.

  13. #1093
    Quote Originally Posted by Spritely View Post
    One source says he stabbed her twice in the chest, which killed her, and then slit her throat just to make sure she couldn't be saved. I don't care to spend the time to see the full police report.

    In any case, you seem to have an odd definition of "walk". Getting convicted of manslaughter does not mean he walks. He's still convicted of a felony serious enough to make him not be hire-able. Whether he spends 1 year or 10 years or more in jail, his entire life is ruined, HIV positive or not (and he's most likely not). Being convicted is NOT walking.
    Look, if I kill someone like this and I only get a year in prison. That is a walk, in my book. I'd go as far to say in most people's book. So what if he isn't hireable, he won't go without, there are systems in place.

    Section 8, food stamps, and SS will get him more than he needs without even working again. My family is shit, born from shit, and will die in shit. I'm one of few, with little jail time, and nothing on my Adult record. They are all on the system, none of hardly any of them work due to being non hireable by convicted felony records. Sadly, most live better than I do, with a College education and a stable job.

    As a person, that nearly killed someone as a teenager, for hitting my mother. I went to Juvenal for 2 years, 16-18. When you fucking do shit like this, and put people in those places, you can't say what you would do. So yeah, I know where this guy is coming from and how easily it would be to go overboard.

    ---------- Post added 2012-09-11 at 02:05 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by semaphore View Post
    Doesn't matter. He went out of his way to get a weapon that he used to kill with deliberation. That's malicious aforethought, while the actions demonstrated a clear intent to kill.


    You make it sound like he was experiencing a home invasion or something. "I have HIV" aren't even fighting words. But regardless, again, his actions showed or can be quite reasonably argued to have shown malicious aforethought as well as deadly intent. He may plea down to manslaughter but he's not walking without some colossal upset.
    Walking with Man-slaughter is a win in his book. It's basically a justification. That's how I view it.

  14. #1094
    Quote Originally Posted by Jokerfiend View Post
    Walking with Man-slaughter is a win in his book. It's basically a justification. That's how I view it.
    Pleaing down to manslaughter is not "walking". If you are just going to redefine words like that then sure anything could be a win in your book.

  15. #1095
    Quote Originally Posted by semaphore View Post
    Pleaing down to manslaughter is not "walking". If you are just going to redefine words like that then sure anything could be a win in your book.
    If you are looking at life in prison, getting it plead down to a year and some probation is a win and justification. The fact they would even offer him a plea. Means the DA is unsure of a murder conviction and would rather a man-slaughter charge, for a guaranteed conviction.

    That right there is justification.

    I'm not redefining anything, I'm using real world meaning. See, when you get plead down, that is considering "walking with". So when someone tells you they walked with man-slaughter, they mean they were charged with Murder but WALKED WITH man-slaughter. Get it? Sorry, prison talk and all....

  16. #1096
    Quote Originally Posted by semaphore View Post
    Cite one for every day of the week then...

    I mean, again, I'm not saying he has no chance whatsoever. I'm just pointing out that he isn't likely to get off with a slap on the wrists, and saying "well there are exceptions and statistical outliers" doesn't really change that he has a terrible case on his hands.
    I don't argue that he has a bad case. That said, maybe I am too cynical but it seems to me that the American Justice system has little to do with justice and more to do with how much money you have. If you can afford a "quality" defense you can get away with murder, literally. Granted I don't think Dunn will have a "quality" defense, (but that remains to be seen) so he will likely end up guilty of something. Also as the poll here has shown it is going to be tough to find a jury willing to unanimously convict him of murder. If the defense handles the jury selection properly manslaughter is a far more likely scenario than murder IMHO.

  17. #1097
    Pit Lord Bryntrollian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Outside Black Gate of Mordor...
    Posts
    2,484
    Quote Originally Posted by semaphore View Post
    Doesn't matter. He went out of his way to get a weapon that he used to kill with deliberation. That's malicious aforethought, while the actions demonstrated a clear intent to kill.


    You make it sound like he was experiencing a home invasion or something. "I have HIV" aren't even fighting words. But regardless, again, his actions showed or can be quite reasonably argued to have shown malicious aforethought as well as deadly intent. He may plea down to manslaughter but he's not walking without some colossal upset.
    Holding the fact that you are HIV positive from your sex partner is a crime
    Synek - best rogue in the world
    Quote Originally Posted by Darsithis View Post
    I don't think I know what the acronym "tsg" is. It's not RBG's or Arena, random battlegrounds, or any form of dungeon or raid that I can think of. What does it mean?

  18. #1098
    A difficult one...

    Didn't I hear somewhere, that knowingly risking transmition of HIV to somebody who does not have it practically equal to manslaughter anyway? Could she not had been tried herself had she survived?

    Do we know, how she told him that he could have it? Did she do it maliciously? For somebody who knowingly has HIV to not tell any possible sexual partner about it, is despicable in itself. If she did it maliciously, to me, I can't say that I wouldn't snap either. I'm an eye for an eye kinda guy.

    Does admitting murder become irrelevent if your are deemed "not sane" at the time of the admition? If you are deemed "not sane" at any time, can any action, "deadly intent" or not, be seen in the same context as somebody who is sane at the time of the same action?

    My feeling is this, and I may be wrong as I havent read either the story, or 98% of this thread, but it seems she told him maliciously, or did it on purpse. If this is true, and he snapped and killed her, I can see his reasoning. If not, and she didn't know, or was an accident, then this man needs to be jailed.

    There are too many factors, and as far as I know, not enough information.

    Interesting topic though.

    BTW,

    "That said, I'm going to bed. Having a conversation in this context with someone with an avatar alluding to heroine use is just odd. "... Brilliant. Welcome to my signature.
    Quote Originally Posted by Spritely View Post
    That said, I'm going to bed. Having a conversation in this context with someone with an avatar alluding to heroine use is just odd.

  19. #1099
    Quote Originally Posted by Jokerfiend View Post
    I'm not redefining anything, I'm using real world meaning. See, when you get plead down, that is considering "walking with". So when someone tells you they walked with man-slaughter, they mean they were charged with Murder but WALKED WITH man-slaughter. Get it? Sorry, prison talk and all....
    Well then you seem to be the only one using that customised "real world meaning" where getting jailed for a crime is "walking". For pretty much the rest of the world, it's apparently means "to walk free".


    Quote Originally Posted by Bryntrollian View Post
    Holding the fact that you are HIV positive from your sex partner is a crime
    So? I didn't say it wasn't.

  20. #1100
    The Lightbringer Collegeguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Minneapolis
    Posts
    3,680
    While I don't agree with what he did, I understand it. Anyone who willingly gives someone a virus is up there with the worst scum on Earth.

    In this case I chose justifiable, but it depends on the context of justifiable. I feel what he did was justified in my opinion, so I would feel fine with sitting next to him in a coffee shop. He did purposeful harm to someone who did purposeful harm to him. If we were in a court of law though, his actions aren't justifiable if I was the judge. Although I wouldn't throw the book, he would get something severe.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •