They are charging and trying for an entirely different crime than the murder.
It is simply not double jeopardy.
They are charging and trying for an entirely different crime than the murder.
It is simply not double jeopardy.
I would have expected the prosecution to present any evidence of that nature at trial to impeach the claim of making a citizen’s arrest. It would also be an element of aggravation, justifying a sterner punishment at sentencing.
Honestly looks like DOJ show boating.
Perhaps, but as above they are addressing an entirely different crime.
What crime? And if you plan to respond violating his civil rights, explain how his civil rights were violated other than that they, falsely imprisoned, assaulted and killed him.
I don’t actually think hate crime laws make a lot of sense, beyond emotional appeal. You can’t criminalize thought, so you have to show an actual criminal act of violence or property destruction, which are already crimes. As an aggravating factor, justifying greater punishment or financial liability, when present, makes complete sense to me.
Hate crime laws are just sentencing enhancements.
I’m having a hard time parsing whether you’re agreeing with sentencing enhancements or not.
What crime? And if you plan to respond violating his civil rights, explain how his civil rights were violated other than that they, falsely imprisoned, assaulted and killed him.
Hate crimes go to motivation, not the crime itself. That is why it is not double jeopardy.
And help me understand: The feds are still bringing civil rights charges though, right?
Where do the “hate crime laws” fit in? Just sentencing phase? Thanks.
And help me understand: The feds are still bringing civil rights charges though, right?
Yes, I believe so.
Where do the “hate crime laws” fit in? Thanks.
I was just talking about why I thought the prosecution went almost out of their way to not make it about race, as a strategy.
Got it. Thanks.
I think a sentencing enhancement is the only thing motivation can be used as. But that begs the question as to what exactly is the crime, other than false imprisonment, assault and murder, that the feds plan to charge to use this as a sentencing enhancement?
Motivation is not a crime in and of itself.
Don’t get me wrong, I don’t see any need for federal charges against these guys - they’re going to spend the rest of their lives in jail, anyway.
I agree. As I said I would sentence them to consecutive terms.
No need for that, even.
They already can’t get less than life in prison.
Motivation is not a crime in and of itself.
Sure it is. Kill a dude: murder.
Kill a dude because he is black: murder plus hate crime
It is an aggravating factor, not a separate crime.
It is an aggravating factor, not a separate crime.
That can be true on the state level, but the feds are bringing entirely different charges from the murder charge.
If the feds can prove the crime was motivated by race, the defendant is convicted with an entirely separate (federal) crime.
I wouldn’t hold my breath.
e7alr:I would have expected the prosecution to present any evidence of that nature at trial to impeach the claim of making a citizen’s arrest. It would also be an element of aggravation, justifying a sterner punishment at sentencing.
It was a strategic choice by the prosecution to not make it about race.
Georgia had no hate crimes law, and life with parole is the minimum sentence for murder in Georgia, so they didn’t lose anything.
They didn’t make it about race because it wasn’t about race.
e7alr:What crime? And if you plan to respond violating his civil rights, explain how his civil rights were violated other than that they, falsely imprisoned, assaulted and killed him.
Hate crimes go to motivation, not the crime itself. That is why it is not double jeopardy.
There is no evidence that these three men were motivated by race.
Don’t get me wrong, I don’t see any need for federal charges against these guys - they’re going to spend the rest of their lives in jail, anyway.
The Feds have no problem wasting your money to pile on. It makes them feel important.