14-year-old charged with murder in deadly crash

[Vanyali]

Bla bla bla, more droll justification to murder people over small personal slights.

Florida to America is pretty much the microcosm of America to the rest of the developed world due to specimens like you running around celebrating executions to underaged kids because they played a small prank.

Bad Pos, bad.

Point where I said he should be shot or hung. Please, I'll wait.

[Naramag]

Dunno how the Law is in other Countries, but in Germany everybody is required by law to render aid. Has nothing to do with the Licencse, except you need to take a course that teaches you how to give aid.

To be exact, there is no law forcing you to render aid. But there is a law that punishes you if you didn't render aid in a situation where it would be possible that you could render aid. That said, the risk to yourself is to be considered. You are not required to run in a burning Building. But if you see someone sitting on the street with a bleeding head, you have to ask if you can help.
But there is a lot of room for Interpretation. If you see an accident and another car has already stopped, you can asume that there is already someone helping and drive past. Even if you could have provided better help. There is of Course no way to check that.

And this is not something that applies only when you have a drivers license, this applies to everyone.

[Val the Moofia Boss]

Stupid kids in over their heads. From just reading the article, I don't have enough information to know their intent. They could've just been idiots with too much time on their hands who peer pressured each other into escalating their behavior to eventually do this, or they could've been legitimate malicious and wanted to cause an accident by baiting someone along and fleeing and see what would happen. I can't rule out either, so it's up to the jury to decide.

I wouldn't have charged the other driver; there are several legally justifiable reasons as to why he may have opted to pursue the kids over helping the woman. For one, good Samaritan laws don't fully protect the do-gooder from being sued, so he has legal incentive to not help and allow the ambulance (or someone else willing to take the risk) to aid her. Second, he may have been led to believe (from the angle of view he had of the crash) that it'd be pointless for him to render assistance anyways. There is no guarantee that he would have the skills or the materials to effectively help her anyways, especially if she was crushed, which would require heavy-duty tools to fix that he wouldn't have anyways. He may have reasoned that he'd be far more effective trying to pursue the kids given that he is already in the car than to stop and do relatively little to save the victim. I'd personally prioritize the victim, but I don't have enough information and wouldn't jump to prosecuting him.

[Cizr]

Hi, don't be ridiculous, the pursuer pulled a gun on him, anyone would run away egg or no.

- - - Updated - - -



Apparently, throwing eggs at people justifies manchildren with poor impulse and anger control to gun down their egg-assailants.

It's no wonder why the US has such a big problem with guns.

Thats no excuse. Charlottesville driver had gun pulled on him too before hitting into that crowd

[Travis B]

Thats no excuse. Charlottesville driver had gun pulled on him too before hitting into that crowd

What's your source for that claim?

[Surfd]

No. What the heck? The person to blame was the guy brandishing a Friggin gun and chasing him. The accident wouldn't have even happened had he not started chasing them with a gun. The kid broke the law and was doing something stupid, But come on! Someone running away from a gun being drawn on them shouldn't be the ones being charged with murder. Maybe manslaughter. But not murder by any means. He was fleeing for his own life.

Umm, this is Texas remember. 99% chance that pulling a gun and waving it threateningly at someone doesn't even register as legally actionable, let alone as an actual crime. Not sure on engaging in a car chase, but quite possibly chasing someone in a vehicle isn't considered a criminal act either (especially considering that the charge they are throwing at the guy is for Failure to Render Assistance for the woman that was hit, and no mention of his pursuit activities).

- - - Updated - - -

Not the same thing. Vandalism is a misdemeanor. Pulling a gun on someone to escalate a situation is typically a felony. So no, he is still in the wrong. You don't pull a gun on an unarmed indivudual. You don't then give Chase to the unarmed individual because things like this can happen.

Again: Texas. It's like a whole other world down there.

[Cizr]

What's your source for that claim?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3r6Kuthe2E

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hz9mKPiDrv4

[Axxil]

Murder, no. Manslaughter? Yes.

[barrsftw]

Article says he gave chase. There is a video yes. So there is proof. It was very high speed.

- - - Updated - - -



Manslaughter*. Who cares what texas messed up law says. Murder has to have intent. There was no intent. Its manslaughter at best. Texas just has a stupid law.

Who cares? Ummm, Texas? You don't get to play God and determine which laws and rules are fair. Like I said before, I feel as if it should be manslaughter too, not murder, but I don't make the rules / laws. Also I'm not a Texan.

- - - Updated - - -

Lethal force?

He did not shoot at the guy. He did not attempt to shoot at him. He, allegedly (and from the view of someone trying to get out of a murder charge), showed his gun and that alone is the reason this poor little child ran a red light and killed someone. No sir, he certainly wasn't doing so anyway to get away from his victim, he would have sat around like an angel if this guy didn't have a gun.

Exactly. The kid got caught and fled. Should have fled on foot and instead of illegally operating a stolen car that eventually killed someone.

[Martymark]

Doesn't "Murder" require intent?

[Mistame]

Doesn't "Murder" require intent?

Literally, it requires intent and premeditation. Legally, however, there are degrees. In this case, the law states that causing a death during the commission of a felony is murder. To what degree I'm not sure.

I see where you are going, but I don't think the logic is as shoddy as you feel it is. The kid is the instigator in this because if you remove the kid, nothing else happens. Every other event in that series is tied to the kid being involved.

If you remove the egg-throwing, is the kid still at fault? There's degrees of justifiable reaction and you have to evaluate them individually. Clearly, the egg-throwing wasn't justified. That's established. Was the guy, who's an adult, engaging in a vehicle chase justified because of a thrown egg or two? I'd say no. Lastly, was the kid justified in fleeing from the guy? If he felt he or his life was in danger, absolutely. And again, the guy is an adult. He has more of an obligation to act responsibly, as courts have demonstrated time and again.

[Rhaide]

And on the next page we were past that, so thanks for being rude. I guess. We already established what it was and that the article had it.

Not going to read through 100 posts to see if your ignorance was corrected. Edit your previous post if you don't want responses like this.

- - - Updated - - -

The no-consent issue likely won't sick in that case and it won't be a felony. Most courts will rule that anyone who lives in your home and has access to your vehicle has consent by extension.

I thought the article said they didn't know who the vehicle belonged to. Is that right? If so, I doubt it was someone in the house.

[Orange Joe]

Hold on a second... He was being chased by someone brandishing a fucking gun. How is this murder? Even outside the fact that he is 14 years old. The fucking balls on that prosecutor...

Because that part isn't confirmed yet.

[Lazuli]

May he receive bountiful amounts of ass rapes in the joint.

[Frolk]

Its murder because he was committing a felony that lead to a death. A lot of states have that.

Pretty sure that "murder" is when u have an intent to kill(i could be wrong), doubt the kid had intention of killing anyone, should be charged with "manslaughter".

[Xandrigity]

Its murder because he was committing a felony that lead to a death. A lot of states have that.

Bingo

It occurred during the commision of a felony.

[IdentityCrisis]

Something is wrong with Gen Y-Z and this article is proof of this.

[MrLachyG]

Murder is a bit harsh, should be manslaughter. Wasn’t his intent to kill. I hope the driver with the gun got charged as well, he or she indirectly caused the death

[Celista]

Something is wrong with Gen Y-Z and this article is proof of this.

More telling are the people in this thread who are defending his actions with "he's just a kid".

[McFuu]

I can't see how this is murder instead of manslaughter.

I don't specifically remember how it works in Texas, but I think murder is a catchall for anything from Manslaughter to 1st degree murder.