Only charged with assault & robbery... REALLY?

[Najja]

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/...ain-peds_N.htm

People walk on train tracks all the time.... Throwing someone down onto tracks is not attempted murder unless you can prove that he wanted to murder her by doing that.

Can you prove that? Can you prove that he wasn't just throwing her down in a pit because she was struggling against him? That he didn't just want to stop her from chasing after him? That he didn't want to delay her plea for help giving him time to get away?

Sure fine, maybe he was trying to stop her from pursuing. I even thought of that while watching the video. This isnt like dropping someone on a set of normal train tracks though, you can easily roll off those and we well in the clear, these you have to hope you weren't injured in the fall in a way that would keep you from standing and that you are also tall enough to climb out.

Also can't they charge him with all three? Assault, Robbery and attempted murder? Doesn't he still get time with the first two sticking without question? Whatever the out come it needs to be more time then just Assault and Robbery because it wasn't as simple as striking someone and running off with their stuff, she was thrown into a seriously dangerous and potentially fatal situation.

[artemishunter1]

"Things got out of hand and I threw her around, I didn't intend on killing her!"
Yup, case closed and he walks away from it.

Spin it all you want. The DA doesn't think an attempted-murder charge would hold in court!
But I forgot I am on the internet, where the average forumposter knows more about science than scientists, where they are better in law than a DA, etc etc.

Don't like what they did? Apply for his job, since obviously you know more about law than actual lawyers.

things did not get out of hand. There was no prior fighting. He took her forcibly and threw her down the tracks. How can you spin any of it?

[Deleted]

Just to chime in, not sure why but anyways...

Personally, in my opinion, yes its attempted murder. The guy is clearly a scumbag, and I feel that if you throw someone onto subway tracks then you either intend their death or you dont give two hoots if they survive, which in my eyes is the same thing. In the uk we have the 3rd electrified rail, and subway train tracks in general are completely different to roads and overground trains in regards to danger and means of escape.

My eyes are not what casts judgement though, and unfortunately he probably would have been found not guilty of attempted murder or even assault with intent. Thats the way the law works, there needs to be no reasonable doubt. Judging criminals for their crimes is a tough thing to do, I've served jury duty before and no doubt a few who read this will have, and nothing is an open-closed case and despite what you feel inside for sure happened and should happen to the perpetrator, the justice systems we have (varying across countries but in our hemisphere more-or-less similar) are designed as such for good reasons.

Guys a dick and needs to gtfo my planet though, i'd have him strung up for what he did even if it didnt involve the subway tracks. Hard to watch him hit a woman like that without raging. Scumbag.

[cubby]

This just happened today, iirc, so the easiest and obvious charge is what is clearly demonstrated. I'm sure the prosecutor is just lining up his/her ducks before bringing up the attempted murder charge. Justice should be swift, but it should also be thorough. Today's instant media forces people to think that one thing is happening (or not happening) when really it just takes longer to get the whole process organized.

---------- Post added 2013-01-18 at 09:54 PM ----------

It's almost impossible to prove 'intent'.

So again:
Do you want them to come up with GREAT charges that result into him walking away as a free man?
Or do you want him to go to jail for a year?

It's rather easy to prove intent, it's done on a daily basis in courts around the world.

[Deleted]

We can't really see what happened to the girl on the tracks. He looks at her twice before running off, maybe she was showing signs of life and that's the real kicker here. It's not like he pushed her out infront of an oncomming train.

[Powerogue]

It'd be just assault and robbery if he didn't chuck her onto the train tracks. He knew full well what could happen. Attempted murder.

We can't really see what happened to the girl on the tracks. He looks at her twice before running off, maybe she was showing signs of life and that's the real kicker here. It's not like he pushed her out infront of an oncomming train.

Like the train they were both waiting for? That's an oncoming train.

[Deleted]

Looks more like poorly thought out CC.

[Speaknoevil]

Where's the petition to have him thrown in front of a train?

[Deleted]

Where's the petition to have him thrown in front of a train?

In some backwards developing nation.

[Seranthor]

She told him Obama was going to take away his 2nd amendment and this is how he reacted.

Prove this, otherwise I'm calling this bullshit.

[Video Games]

See if we banned guns stuff like this wouldn't happen.

[Leonaras]

Prove this, otherwise I'm calling this bullshit.

That comment was clearly made in jest.

On the topic though, I believe he should be charged with more. Yeah sure one can argue that there weren't any trains coming right then. But the fact is he beat her in the face then tossed her a fair distance down onto metal tracks. She could have been unconscious for god knows how long down there. Do you honestly think if a train did come he was going to get off with manslaughter? Given the video evidence?

It was attempted murder, no matter how you try to sugar coat the situation.

[Deleted]

Am I the only one that thinks prosecuting the assailant for Assault and Robbery AND Attempted murder as two separate charges is the elephant in the room here? Why is 'or' the only option?

1. He definitely goes to prison for the robbery

2. Gives a jury the option of deciding if he then attempted to murder the victim after the initial crime of assault and robbery.

[Seranthor]

See if we banned guns stuff like this wouldn't happen.

Really? I dont remember seeing a gun in this video... can you point out where he had a gun? Please, I'm interested how banning guns would have prevented this?

---------- Post added 2013-01-19 at 04:42 AM ----------

That comment was clearly made in jest.

On the topic though, I believe he should be charged with more. Yeah sure one can argue that there weren't any trains coming right then. But the fact is he beat her in the face then tossed her a fair distance down onto metal tracks. She could have been unconscious for god knows how long down there. Do you honestly think if a train did come he was going to get off with manslaughter? Given the video evidence?

It was attempted murder, no matter how you try to sugar coat the situation.

I was solely replying to the asinine comment about Obama and the 2nd Amendment. Should he be charged with more than he was? in my opinion, yes.

[Anakso]

Spin it all you want. The DA doesn't think an attempted-murder charge would hold in court!

Can he not be charged with aggravated assault, Robbery and Attempted murder? That way if it sticks, good. If not then he'll still have the other two charges. Honest question because I actually don't know but if he can be, he should be.

Especially since all three were separate incidents. Barrage of punches=Aggravated assault. Throwing her on the tracks=Attempted murder. Taking her phone=Robbery.

[Speaknoevil]

In some backwards developing nation.

Fear is the best deterrent for people like him.

[Tzalix]

Really? I dont remember seeing a gun in this video... can you point out where he had a gun? Please, I'm interested how banning guns would have prevented this?

I do believe he was being sarcastic.

[alemaite]

See if we banned guns stuff like this wouldn't happen.

You're right this wouldn't happen, she'd be dead now.

[rhorle]

Can he not be charged with aggravated assault, Robbery and Attempted murder?

He could be. But why waste your time with a charge you will have a hard to proving? There are plenty of defenses against attempted murder. Some of them I mentioned in earlier posts in this thread. Despite people thinking it is an easy charge to prove, it is actually difficult to prove as such. So they go with the easy charges, and the ones that have a possible higher sentence

The article I linked to earlier, while about Georgia law, explains why a DA might not go with Attempted Murder but another crime.

http://www.houstonda.org/houston-cou...ed-murder.html

In Georgia (Pennsylvania might be different) attempt crimes carry half of the sentence of a full crime. And in the legal system half of Life is considered to be 10 years. With assault the DA doesn't have to prove intent at all and assault has a higher sentence. Meaning that the criminal will spend more potential time behind bars then he would if just charge with Attempted Murder.

The key factor here is intent. Intent is hard to prove even if you think it is obvious. Other charges might be added as the case is investigated and more facts are revealed. But again why go for something that might not stick and might offer a lesser sentence. DA's like to take the path of least resistance when it is available. Because it almost ensures the outcome instead of putting it up to a gamble at trial.

[Anakso]

Ah I see, that makes sense then especially if the sentence for assault and robbery is greater than attempted murder.