*Sputter* WHAT???? James Brady's Death a HOMICIDE???

[Jedidiah]

I'm kidding...

But at least partly accurate none-the-less.

[Teallaura]

Since when has that stopped anyone?

Stop being sensible!!!! This is about law and legal stuff - common sense need not apply!
































I'm kidding...

[Sparko]

Since when has that stopped anyone?

yup. just another political football to kick around. It's all marketing. Get gun control in the news again. whether they win or not.

[One Bad Pig]

Unless he is likely to see the outside of a mental hospital in a meaningful way, it's just a waste of time, money and effort.

Since when has that stopped anyone?

[Teallaura]

I doubt they even bother. Unless he is likely to see the outside of a mental hospital in a meaningful way, it's just a waste of time, money and effort.

[Sparko]

Evidence that the jury can weigh as they see fit. Prosecution will argue - in the unlikely event this goes to trial - that the first jury was mistaken. And since sane people have been mistakenly committed, the mere fact he was committed doesn't prove the jury correct.

But the doctors will.

Or maybe they are trying to get the first verdict cancelled and then toss him in regular prison instead of the hospital by claiming he was sane when he shot Reagan to. It is going to be a very hard thing to do.

[Teallaura]

But the verdict will be brought in as evidence. And the fact that he has been in a nuthouse ever since.

Evidence that the jury can weigh as they see fit. Prosecution will argue - in the unlikely event this goes to trial - that the first jury was mistaken. And since sane people have been mistakenly committed, the mere fact he was committed doesn't prove the jury correct.

[Sparko]

Separate trials - and prosecution never argued he was insane. Jury A's findings aren't binding on Jury B.

But the verdict will be brought in as evidence. And the fact that he has been in a nuthouse ever since.

[Teallaura]

Seems pretty simple. If he was insane when he shot Reagan, then he was insane when he shot Brady. They can't argue he was insane and sane at the same time. He was already judged insane so that's pretty much it.

Separate trials - and prosecution never argued he was insane. Jury A's findings aren't binding on Jury B.

[Juvenal]

Seems pretty simple. If he was insane when he shot Reagan, then he was insane when he shot Brady. They can't argue he was insane and sane at the same time. He was already judged insane so that's pretty much it.

Zombie pirate from alternate reality asks, "Don't your lawyers follow logic, too?"

No, they don't.

[Sparko]

Seems pretty simple. If he was insane when he shot Reagan, then he was insane when he shot Brady. They can't argue he was insane and sane at the same time. He was already judged insane so that's pretty much it.

[Epoetker]

Seems a pretty big stretch to me in any case, and granting prosecutors this type of leeway on these cases (where zillions of cofactors have to be considered in the intervening period) is wrongheaded. There are legal categories for 'alive but having to spend mucho dinero on treatments due to the complications of inflicted injury' without having to claim that all deaths from such are MURDER. There's way too much legal mischief possible in a judgment of "died from complications of his previous murder."

And adding people to the Vietnam wall for the same reason is asinine, as well, just to be thorough.

[DesertBerean]

Hmfh...*snort*.....

[Teallaura]

It'll be okay...

[DesertBerean]

1) The charge of murder stems from the cause of death so yes, even 30 years later if the gunshot is the ultimate cause of death, the charge is perfectly well founded. These are rare but they do occur. A lot of AIDS cases were of this type (where the infection was deliberate).

Hmmm....Ok.... (grumble)....does kinda makes sense...