The owners of a gay bar in St. Louis were getting ready to relax Sunday night when a police vehicle crashed through the front of their business, Bar:PM.
Seems like if the owners are guilty of anything worthy of arrest, the pigs are guilty of property damage, assault and battery, attempted murder (all these add “with a deadly weapon” for the fact that they’re armed and a 2000lb metal box is certainly deadly) , reckless driving, and a litany of other crimes that should land them in prison with life-crippling fines.
I think it’d depend. There are degrees of murder. You can ABSOLUTELY get charged with murder if someone dies due to extreme reckless neglegence in some jurisdictions.
It’s kinda’ exactly why Derek Chauvin is in jail. He never intended to kill anyone, but he was so insanely reckless and careless. He was found guilty of BOTH lesser degrees of murder and manslaughter.
For a more direct example, just look up all the street racers that get charged with murder.
Unintentional second degree murder is Minnesota’s version of felony murder. Felony murder does not require intent.
Third degree murder in Minnesota requires a “depraved mind” which the example from this story wouldn’t meet.
Edit: As a resident of Minnesota who studied the laws in both my Criminal Code and Criminal Law and Procedure classes, the incident from this article would not meet requirements for murder charges.
Cops lie on official paperwork all the time. “Turnabout is fair play”. It’s not been a long thread, but if you’re having that much trouble keeping track of the conversation, you can read the thread history before responding to remember what we’re talking about currently.
Seems like if the owners are guilty of anything worthy of arrest, the pigs are guilty of property damage, assault and battery, attempted murder (all these add “with a deadly weapon” for the fact that they’re armed and a 2000lb metal box is certainly deadly) , reckless driving, and a litany of other crimes that should land them in prison with life-crippling fines.
Attempted murder is an insane stretch and it devalues your whole comment.
He intended to crash a vehicle. Vehicles are commonly viewed as deadly weapons when used as one. It is not a stretch what so ever.
Removed by mod
No, I just do not believe cops what so ever. At least the angry pigs that love throwing their undeserved power around.
Removed by mod
That’s not the same as intent to kill someone. Murder requires intent, without that it becomes manslaughter
I think it’d depend. There are degrees of murder. You can ABSOLUTELY get charged with murder if someone dies due to extreme reckless neglegence in some jurisdictions.
It’s kinda’ exactly why Derek Chauvin is in jail. He never intended to kill anyone, but he was so insanely reckless and careless. He was found guilty of BOTH lesser degrees of murder and manslaughter.
For a more direct example, just look up all the street racers that get charged with murder.
Unintentional second degree murder is Minnesota’s version of felony murder. Felony murder does not require intent.
Third degree murder in Minnesota requires a “depraved mind” which the example from this story wouldn’t meet.
Edit: As a resident of Minnesota who studied the laws in both my Criminal Code and Criminal Law and Procedure classes, the incident from this article would not meet requirements for murder charges.
So if I decide to crash into a tree, do I get charged with attempted murder?
Even in cases of reckless driving, the charge is manslaughter, proving murder is gonna be hard unless there’s evidence of premeditation
Crashing into a tree would be charged as treeson.
Do we have a /c/treelaw yet?
Deciding to crash into a person is attempted murder. People live in houses.
They crashed into a place of business (as said in the article) at 1230am. No people are around shops at that time.
Your argument would never stand in court.
It was a bar so it’s very likely there were people around but it would still be hard to prove intent to kill.
Is that why the owner and others were still in the building? You’re literally making shit up that doesn’t even apply here.
Cops shoot people driving cars and claim it was for officer safety because the person could have run them over all the time.
How is that in any way relevant?
The officers crashed into a building, nobody started shooting ever in this case.
Cops lie on official paperwork all the time. “Turnabout is fair play”. It’s not been a long thread, but if you’re having that much trouble keeping track of the conversation, you can read the thread history before responding to remember what we’re talking about currently.
If person driving = using a deadly weapon to justify shooting at the driver then cop driving = using a deadly weapon.