• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Getaway driver arrested for murder.

Ranb said:
Yes, I'm talking about the driver and I presume you are to. theprestige suggested that you might be talking about the shooter.


Yes it is shocking indeed. Getting your dumb ass killed is an occupational hazard for home invaders. Given the reputation of the USA as armed to the teeth, why are people thinking they can get away with this kind of stupidity?
Click to expand...

17 is an impressionable age. Mix it in with stupidity and naivety...
 
Metullus said:
Interestingly, the linked article states that the accused did a little more than merely act as the getaway driver: "Rodriguez planned the burglary, took the three boys to the house, and was waiting in the driveway until she heard shots and left."
Click to expand...

Yes, that is interesting. It definitely makes the prosecutor's decision to bring a murder charge more scrutable. She hatched a plan to send her accomplices in harm's way, and now she's being held responsible for the harm that befell them. I have to admit, I hadn't read the story that closely, and was having trouble figuring out what the prosecutor was thinking.
 
theprestige said:
The felony didn't result in a homicide. The shooter isn't being charged.

It seems the driver is being charged with the separate crime of "getting her friends killed by taking part in their home invasion, i.e., murdering them".
Click to expand...
The felony absolutely resulted in homicide. Just as if a bank guard killed a bank robber. It is not necessary that the shooter be guilty of committing a crime, only that the death was a direct result of the underlying felony.
 
theprestige said:
The linked story doesn't say felony murder.
Click to expand...

Felony murder rule mentioned here:

She was booked into the Wagoner County Jail on three complaints each of first-degree murder and first-degree burglary. A person who is committing a felony when a death occurs can be charged with felony murder.
Click to expand...

She's in a world of trouble now. This is not some stretch by the prosecutor at all; it's a textbook case.
 
Last edited:
theprestige said:
Put it another way: If she's to be charged with felony murder or accessory to murder, then who committed the murder?
Click to expand...
The homicides occurred during the course of the commission of a felony. There is no need for any of the perpetrators to have pulled the trigger.
 
I just realised that I had been reading this as the home invaders having killed the homeowner, rather than the homeowner having killed one of the home invaders, and now I feel teh dum.

Metullus said:
The felony absolutely resulted in homicide. Just as if a bank guard killed a bank robber. It is not necessary that the shooter be guilty of committing a crime, only that the death was a direct result of the underlying felony.
Click to expand...
But was murder the purpose of the felony? Was it the intent of the home invaders to murder? If you're judging on intent, isn't that kind of important?
 
arthwollipot said:
But was murder the purpose of the felony? Was it the intent of the home invaders to murder? If you're judging on intent, isn't that kind of important?
Click to expand...

Nope. The intent was to commit the felony, that is enough. They committed a felony, intentionally, and it happened to result in murder. Thus they get charged. Had any of the three survived they'd be charged with the murder of the other two. It's not just a thing to get the driver.
 
She'll get a plea bargain. The whole story is sad but honestly, 3 guys bust in your house to rob you and you shoot them? Sounds a lot more justified than a lot of shooting deaths we've discussed here.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
She'll get a plea bargain. The whole story is sad but honestly, 3 guys bust in your house to rob you and you shoot them? Sounds a lot more justified than a lot of shooting deaths we've discussed here.
Click to expand...

Plus they were armed, so it's not like they were lighthearted Robin Hoods to begin with.
 
arthwollipot said:
I just realised that I had been reading this as the home invaders having killed the homeowner, rather than the homeowner having killed one of the home invaders, and now I feel teh dum.

But was murder the purpose of the felony? Was it the intent of the home invaders to murder? If you're judging on intent, isn't that kind of important?
Click to expand...
IANAL, but my understanding is that it is not necessary for the perpetrators to intend to kill someone, only that the underlying felony, in this case the home invasion, be the proximate cause of the killing. Absent the underlying felony, nobody would have been hurt.
 
arthwollipot said:
I just realised that I had been reading this as the home invaders having killed the homeowner, rather than the homeowner having killed one of the home invaders, and now I feel teh dum.

But was murder the purpose of the felony? Was it the intent of the home invaders to murder? If you're judging on intent, isn't that kind of important?
Click to expand...

No, all they had was a knife and some brass knuckle dusters, according to early reports. In the USA if your accomplices in a felony die, for whatever reason in the course of the crime (usually burglary or robbery) you can be charged with their first degree murder.

Apparently, this state has a 'Make My Day' law, which means you can shoot any intruder to smithereens with impunity.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
She'll get a plea bargain. The whole story is sad but honestly, 3 guys bust in your house to rob you and you shoot them? Sounds a lot more justified than a lot of shooting deaths we've discussed here.
Click to expand...
I suspect that in Oklahoma the death penalty is on the table. She will plea it down to life with the possibility of parole.
 
Vixen said:
No, all they had was a knife and some brass knuckle dusters, according to early reports. In the USA if your accomplices in a felony die, for whatever reason in the course of the crime (usually burglary or robbery) you can be charged with their first degree murder.

Apparently, this state has a 'Make My Day' law, which means you can shoot any intruder to smithereens with impunity.
Click to expand...

"All they had was a knife?" Are you kidding? Three people break into an occupied home in the night armed with a knife and you don't think that constitutes a deadly threat? That's exactly the textbook situation when it's perfectly acceptable to kill people!
 
Vixen said:
I don't think so? One had a knife on his person. One had knuckle dusters.
Click to expand...

You have a strange definition of "armed" if you don't consider a knife a weapon. Do you require a link to prominent murders by stabbing?
 
TragicMonkey said:
"All they had was a knife?" Are you kidding? Three people break into an occupied home in the night armed with a knife and you don't think that constitutes a deadly threat? That's exactly the textbook situation when it's perfectly acceptable to kill people!
Click to expand...
It wasn't night. They broke in at 12:30pm.
 
TragicMonkey said:
"All they had was a knife?" Are you kidding? Three people break into an occupied home in the night armed with a knife and you don't think that constitutes a deadly threat? That's exactly the textbook situation when it's perfectly acceptable to kill people!
Click to expand...

I think it would have been obvious they were kids. Gangly, lanky, svelte.
 
TragicMonkey said:
You have a strange definition of "armed" if you don't consider a knife a weapon. Do you require a link to prominent murders by stabbing?
Click to expand...

It was 'found on the deceased person's body'. I recall one survey showed an enormous number of people carry a knife. It doesn't show intent to use it, except perhaps in self-defence.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom