Premeditation?

lawlady84

New Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2006
Messages
1,184
Reaction score
52
Do we think this was a premeditated murder? Did RC plan to kill Annie when he allegedly texted her that morning?


I'm not sure what I think. The fact that he allegedly asked her to come to the lab could be premeditation, he was setting it up.

But I am leaning towards NOT premeditation because it seems to me he panicked after it happened. I keep wondering- why didn't he use Annie's key-card to move through rooms, so LE would think she left the building (and wouldn't focus in on the lab). If he planned this out, wouldn't he have tried to make it look like they left the building at different times?
 
i think "premeditation" and "planned" are 2 different concepts (at least legally).

I don't think he planned this.
 
i think "premeditation" and "planned" are 2 different concepts (at least legally).

I don't think he planned this.

You're absolutely right, one can legally "premeditate" in a minute. I think I am asking both questions.
 
A possible scenario
Annie was spending 10-13 hours/day in the lab because of upcoming wedding, she was an excited, happy, female, and successful Doctoral student - perhaps the kind Clark can't stand

Maybe NOT perfect in lab procedures due to the time stress of wedding

What ever Annie did over the weekend and Monday sent Clark into an uproar

He ruminated about punishing Annie - maybe couldn't sleep Monday night - fantasized about laying into Annie and murdering her - he arrived at work on Tuesday am, angry

Tuesday early AM he text Annie to meet at the lab

Annie grabbed some documentation to show Clark she had not violated protocol in lab - went to Amistad bldg. and swiped in

Clark confronted Annie - she misread his anger (pre-occupied), showed him documentation

I believe Clark had every intention of laying into Annie for weekend or Monday mishaps -

When meeting with Annie (he was already furious) - he acted on those fantasies

Just a possible made up scenario...maybe in his fantasies he had a relationship with Annie, and when she unintentionally dismissed him - he murdered her (a reenactment of his fantasy)
I call this planned and rehearsed - but in his fantasies. Annie wasn't picked out in random; Clark knew Annie...and his topic...and had rehearsed. pre-meditated? Planned? imho
 
i think "premeditation" and "planned" are 2 different concepts (at least legally).

I don't think he planned this.

I agree...but...what moved him to the point of murder...that is such a huge leap from just being angry over some lab protocols.

I realize that he had that possible rape issue back in high school, but how likely is it that a person with that kind of inner violence can go that many years without more violence. Something more is going to come out.
 
Hasn't anyone here ever been absolutely enraged by a co-worker before? Whatever you're doing may seem small to someone else, but it's your life and it's big to you. If someone starts to get under your skin, in small or big ways, it's hard to keep from getting more and more annoyed, even when they do little things. I know the one time I lost my temper with a co-worker, over ten years ago, I was really out of control. Fortunately, I'm not prone to violence, so for me, being out of control means I shook and raised my voice and slammed a door, but I can remember feeling like the entire world had gone away and it was just me and this other grad student, yelling at one another over disk space on the lab workstation. It was important to both of our research, but in the scheme of things, it was totally idiotic for us to be yelling about it. I was stressed, he was stressed, I saw him as being a hog of limited resources, he saw me as being in the way of his research, we got on each others' nerves, and we both simultaneously snapped. I guess that's why I don't find it impossible to believe that the confrontation that lead to her strangling was just over things in the lab.

Not that that makes RC any less nuts. Strangling someone is nuts.
 
The part that gets me is that he strangled her to death. That's not a flash of anger, but sustained rage, sadism, and determination in killing someone off--slowly. He most likely could have killed her quickly, bludgeoning her to death, but he chose strangulation. So I don't think he all of a sudden decided to kill her but has been thinking about killing her for a while, in general, and then panicked after he finally did it.
 
The part that gets me is that he strangled her to death. That's not a flash of anger, but sustained rage, sadism, and determination in killing someone off--slowly. He most likely could have killed her quickly, bludgeoning her to death, but he chose strangulation. So I don't think he all of a sudden decided to kill her but has been thinking about killing her for a while, in general, and then panicked after he finally did it.

no. bludgeoning is messy in the extreme and difficult. Strangulating is simple quick and not inherently sadistic. a strong enough assailant renders the victim unconscious within a couple of seconds.

a 180 lb man strangling a 90 lb woman does the following:
1) renders the victim unconscious within 5 to 8 seconds by ending blood flow to brain
2) instantaneously damages windpipe so the unconscious victim will succumb to traumatic asphyxia without medical intervention within minutes (tracheotomy)

I don't know where you pull "sustained sadism" out of something that takes five seconds and is the absolute cleanest method of killing someone weaker
 
A possible scenario
Annie was spending 10-13 hours/day in the lab because of upcoming wedding, she was an excited, happy, female, and successful Doctoral student - perhaps the kind Clark can't stand
Perhaps she was an annoying self centered person who was conflicted about being married (mood swings before marriage are the norm) who broke all the procedural rules and made his charged job harder.

Not to speak ill of the dead, or excuse the killing at all, but you are ascribing all kinds of states of mind to the victim and the killer that are not proven.

I think the way the crime was committed makes it almost certain that it was unpremeditated.

Perhaps he got to work on Tuesday finding that she had screwed something up created some kind of problem for him, he sends her a text saying why did you do this, or dome in so we can discuss proper procedures, and perhaps she arrived and dismissed his concerns or was condescending and he went berserk.

When someone dies EVERYONE says they are nice, for all we know she was very hard to get along with or the nicest person on earth. we simply don't know.

also random has nothing to do with premediation. we have zero evidence of premeditation on this one so fat and all the indications point to non premeditation. more likely scenario, she did something worn and he was sticker. he called her in to tell her not to do it again. they were both in bad moods they argued and were condescending to each other. she stuck him and he struck her or visa versa, he grabbed her throat and with seconds had intentionally (second degree) or accidentally (third degree) killed her.

this guy is going to plead on second degree and it will be accepted, I give that 99% odds unless we see evidence (not speculation) of him voicing hatred of this woman to witnesses or in wrign from before the crime.
 
I'm with those who think that the way the crime was committed made it seem unplanned to me. That is, I don't think he woke up that morning thinking: "Today is the day I will lure Annie Le to the lab and murder her." It doesn't appear as if there was any planning done at all, no idea of what to do with the body, no thought as to a better place to commit the crime, no pre-establishing of an alibi, etc.

However, from everything I've heard about strangulation there was certainly time in there to stop the murder. It's not like a one-second 'pull the trigger and now the person is dead and no taking it back' moment. Or giving someone a shove off a cliff, and once that two-second act is done, they're done. He started violence against her, and then at some point early on I think he consciously decided (perhaps not in a clear state of mind, but a decision was nonetheless made) to continue the act to it murderous conclusion. So for those few minutes, yes, he had premeditated the tragic conclusion.
 
While NOT a "legal beagle", I've spent more minutes of my life in the company of them (both pros and def) and the convoluted logic of the law has rubbed off....but just a bit! The legal premeditation can occur within seconds, think: continuing the action of applying pressure vs stopping! while pre-planning a crime can take days (and some how the perps still make boo boos!).

IMHO, this crime meets the legal definition of premeditation and could aptly be demonstrated by the simple actions of taking a stopwatch and showing just how L O N G it takes to strangle another human being to DEATH!

I've done such demonstrations in court (yeah, it's dramatic but heck, sometimes show and tell is the best type of education); showing the effectiveness of occluding Simultaneously both major arteries, the sustained & significant! pressure needed to bring about unconsciousness and death. More likely is the scenario that RC applied pressure to the jugular veins, prolonged and constant, perhaps applying stronger force as she struggled then gradually fell unconscious, at which point he probably continued to apply pressure but now also against her trachea.

Any way one cuts it: NOT STOPPING HIS ACTIONS removes this from assault and battery to homicide, premeditated
 
IMHO, this crime meets the legal definition of premeditation and could aptly be demonstrated by the simple actions of taking a stopwatch and showing just how L O N G it takes to strangle another human being to DEATH!

I've done such demonstrations in court (yeah, it's dramatic but heck, sometimes show and tell is the best type of education); showing the effectiveness of occluding Simultaneously both major arteries, the sustained & significant! pressure needed to bring about unconsciousness and death.

(bolded by me)....
I can not visualize this. Did you do a strangling demo on a person? :sick: or a dummy?

You said you are not a lawyer...are you a strangulation expert??
 
Clark may not have had a steller career, but he was not stupid:

According to CNN: "Clark was an honor student at Branford High School in suburban New Haven"

http://edition.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/09/17/raymond.clark.profile/

Had he thought the murder through, I am certain he would have done it differently than he did. He would not have killed her in a place that was so secure, where his every movement was traced by swipe cards and video cameras. Where it was impossible to effectively hide the body. He would not have sent her emails and text messages. He would have found a way not to leave his DNA all over her (gloves, hair net,etc).

It may have been premeditated in the legal sense (he strangled her and had time to stop but did not), but not in the practical sense. And it certainly was not planned. If he had planned it, he would have done a better job covering his tracks.
 
Clark may not have had a steller career, but he was not stupid:

According to CNN: "Clark was an honor student at Branford High School in suburban New Haven"

http://edition.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/09/17/raymond.clark.profile/

Had he thought the murder through, I am certain he would have done it differently than he did. He would not have killed her in a place that was so secure, where his every movement was traced by swipe cards and video cameras. Where it was impossible to effectively hide the body. He would not have sent her emails and text messages. He would have found a way not to leave his DNA all over her (gloves, hair net,etc).

It may have been premeditated in the legal sense (he strangled her and had time to stop but did not), but not in the practical sense. And it certainly was not planned. If he had planned it, he would have done a better job covering his tracks.

IMHO just from what I've seen so far revealed in this case. My opinon is subject to change as facts that can be verified by LE come out...

I agree with your statement I bolded. The prosection could try to prove premeditation in the legal sense...yes.

And the defense could use choice of place in which he murdered Annie, his actions immediately after her murder to include actually hiding her body in the same bldg as she was murdered...to show it wasn't a premeditated murder. JMHO.

This will be interesting to see how this trial goes.

ETA: Since we haven't seen the actual autopsy report and we haven't had LE or the ME make statments to the media, we have no clue as to how she died and what injuries she sustained. That impedes us a lot IMHO.
 
There is so much media on this that I am not sure what is fact and what is not. But it regards to what I have read:

If he hid bloody clothes above the ceiling tiles and they have him leaving work with different clothes it makes me think...do you always take a different set of clothes to work with you on a normal work day...I don't. Wouldn't this prove premeditation?
 
There is so much media on this that I am not sure what is fact and what is not. But it regards to what I have read:

If he hid bloody clothes above the ceiling tiles and they have him leaving work with different clothes it makes me think...do you always take a different set of clothes to work with you on a normal work day...I don't. Wouldn't this prove premeditation?

You might take a different set of clothes to work if you were cleaning up mouse cages. For example, if you were going to meet friends after work for a drink or a ball game, you probably would not want to smell of mouse urine.
 
(bolded by me)....
I can not visualize this. Did you do a strangling demo on a person? :sick: or a dummy?

You said you are not a lawyer...are you a strangulation expert??



Gene: IF I had performed this demonstration to its ultimate conclusion on a living person, I'd be well housed in Niantic, Ct. for a very long time....either without parole or waiting for the injection! LOL

All kidding aside, I am fortunate to be able to "speak" for the deceased as a forensic pathologist.
 
Strangulation is not quick.

No it's not Stephens I agree. But we don't know at this point if she was strangled. We only know that she suffered traumatic asphyxia as a COD and that could be the result of several different actions and could be exclusive to the layman's definition of strangulation.

We just don't know. IMHO.
 
Gene: IF I had performed this demonstration to its ultimate conclusion on a living person, I'd be well housed in Niantic, Ct. for a very long time....either without parole or waiting for the injection! LOL

All kidding aside, I am fortunate to be able to "speak" for the deceased as a forensic pathologist.

HI Joy!

I posted a video about traumatic asphyxia on another thread. In the video it is mentioned that craniocervical cyanosis may appear in such a case. It was also mentioned that the victim may look dead when they are actually still alive and can be resusitated. Posters wondered why LE had to ID Annie after discovering her body. IF cyanosis did occur it would have cast a very different coloring to Annie's appearance not to mention the five days of decomp. My question is how soon does craniocervical cyanosis appear during an act resulting in oxygen deprivation?
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
159
Guests online
1,150
Total visitors
1,309

Forum statistics

Threads
589,940
Messages
17,927,978
Members
228,009
Latest member
chrsrb10
Back
Top