An occupational hazard for a thief or justification for a murder charge?

[Dinner]

So, are any of the dullards still trying to claim this wasn't murder?

[Sava]

me

[Felch]

Indeed, you do.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/premeditation

deliberate intent, deliberate intention

Holy ****, this was such a retarded response that my subconcious blocked it from my conscious mind. Let's go over the multitude of ways that NYE has made himself look like a coprophagic ****** here.

Putting a bullet into someone who has been shot and is laid out after some time has passed is about as deliberate in taking a life as you'll find. There's no threat, the heat of the moment is gone. Premeditation in law does not require having attended planning sessions and being equipped with a map.

First of all, legal-dictionary.com or whatever does not trump the Minnesota Supreme Court. Even if it did, the very first word in the definition you linked to is "planning"

premeditation n. planning, plotting or deliberating before doing something.

Maybe you should check your link before you try using it in an argument against me. Idiot. Maybe you just don't understand the difference between the verb "deliberating" and the adjective "deliberate." Hint: They don't mean the same thing.

In Minnesota, as we have already discussed, premeditation does require planning.

the state must always prove that, after the defendant formed the intent to kill, some appreciable time passed during which the consideration, planning, preparation or determination required by Minn. Stat. § 609.18 prior to the commission of the act took place.

There is no way to see delivering a coup de grace other than intentional or the result of a defective mind.

Intentional and premeditated are not the same thing under Minnesota law, nor are they they same thing anywhere else you look, fucktard.

premeditated - Think out or plan (an action, especially a crime) beforehand:

intentional - Done on purpose; deliberate:

Do you see the difference between those two? Hint: One of them uses the word "plan."

You could argue mental defect due to some state triggered by the confrontation. He wasn't in his right mind, etc. That's an affirmative defence he's free to argue. Failing that, yes, it was intentional and thus premeditated based on what I've read.

Nope. Here in America the government has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the crime was committed. No reasonable person would doubt a second degree murder charge, but based on what we know from the article the government does not have a strong case to prove premeditation (or any other circumstance that would make this first degree murder). There's no need for an affirmative defense against premeditation. That's up to the government to prove.

You need to step up your game if you want to come after me.

[Dr Strangelove]

Just before I left for my conference I heard a discussion of this case on TV. Apparently the guy adminstered a coup de grace to the girl by placing his pistol under her chin, pointing it at her brain and firing. Sounds pretty cut and dried to me. It was an execution.

[Ming]

Do you see the difference between those two? Hint: One of them uses the word "plan."

Yes, there is a big difference. I agree.
However, in reading the story in OP and other sources, it sure sounded like he planned to kill somebody.

Smith told police that he armed himself and set up recording devices following repeated break-ins

Plus, it seems he had a tarp ready as well... It sure sounds like he PLANNED to kill somebody.


Between his actions, how he talked to the victims, the way he killed them... the fact that in advance, he armed himself, had a tarp ready, set up recording devices... It sure sounds premeditated to me. He was just sitting around waiting for somebody to kill.

[Felch]

Ming disagrees with me, but at least he knows what premeditation means.

[Sava]

Weren't you just arguing against that for the whole thread?

[Felch]

No, I was arguing against the absurd definitions of premeditation that some people were using. Ming believes that Smith prepared to kill the kids before the break-in occurred. If that's the case, that would qualify as premeditation. Do you see the difference?

[Sava]

Flip flop flip flop. Pick a lane.

[Pax]

http://www.myfoxtwincities.com/story/25327636/man-shot-outside-south-dekalb-mall

When I saw the post, this is what I thought you were referring too.

[DinoDoc]

http://www.myfoxtwincities.com/story...th-dekalb-mall

When I saw the post, this is what I thought you were referring too.

He shouldn't be facing criminal charges either.

[Sava]

He shouldn't be facing criminal charges either.

from link:

Georgia law forbids the use of deadly force in protecting property.

I guess DD just does not respect the rule of law.

[DinoDoc]

I guess DD just does not respect the rule of law.

DD sees nothing wrong with the actions of the man in the link Pax provided.

[Sava]

DD sees nothing wrong with the actions of the man in the link Pax provided.

I know! You have no respect for the rule of law.

[kentonio]

DD sees nothing wrong with the actions of the man in the link Pax provided.

So what about the inevitable cases where the 'thief' turns out to be someone trying to get in the wrong car? Or the 'prowler' who is actually someone selling something or knocking to ask for help? Shoot first and then if innocent people die then it's a price worth paying?