I know #1 is premetitaed, and #2 is none premetitated, but murder is murder! If convicted, they should get life or the needle regardless. I was watching law and order. 3 kids were shot, one died, two others didnt. But it was a hate related crime turned out cause they were jewish and blk. The "perp" got 25 to life. What do you think he should get if he pled guilty?
2007-11-05 04:33:39 · 5 answers · asked by downriverguy66 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
The idea is that if you plan out a murder, you had time to think it over, and still executed the plan. Non-premeditated means you didn't plan it out, thus didn't have time to think about your actions. It just shows two levels of wrong. In one case, the person is evil during times of rational thinking, the other, they are evil during one moment which may or may not have included rational thinking.
2007-11-05 04:40:53 · answer #1 · answered by Take it from Toby 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Homicide is the key Fraze here. 1 st degree intentional Homicide and ect. Murder falls into the reckless category or during the commitment of an other act in most states, you kill a person in the act of a robbery, for example.
2007-11-05 14:26:51 · answer #2 · answered by schneider2294@sbcglobal.net 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's all about intent.
And no, I do not agree with that. IMO there is a difference.
2007-11-05 12:42:14 · answer #3 · answered by Run Lola Run 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
because one comes before two..
2007-11-05 16:52:44 · answer #4 · answered by LoLo 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no, because you can actually murder someone accidentially, and it is not planned out....
2007-11-05 12:41:13 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋