Premeditation

[lin]

I think Huck was originally charged with Felony Murder and ultimately convicted of same.
or does anyone know if he was charged with the same charges as KC but convicted of Felony Murder?
TIA

I'll look it up. Posting prior to save others the effort. Will edit in a few if it's there.

ETA: It appears to me that he was initially charged with felony murder with the kidnapping as the predicate or underlying felony.

One may verify this by searching here.

2nd ETA: Felony murder is a capital offense; don't want anyone confused by reading 'capital murder.'

 

[Wudge]

The IF question was in reference to the premedition part, not a question as to whether or not she died from asphyxiation. Semantics.

If I ever kill someone, I hope you are on the jury. But this is not going to happen in my lifetime, nor yours.

That's the problem. You are basing your proof of premeditation on a question. But questions are not evidence. Hence, your basis is lacking evidence.

(Though I'm not sure that bothers you or would bother you if you were seated on the jury).

 

[RR0004]

What question?

Respectfully, do you think she's guilty?

I was assuming you did (really)...so how would you present the evidence to the jury so that they clearly hear it?

ETA: Oh...and what the heck does titcr mean?

 

[Brini]

Incorrect (and incorrect in an absolutely huge way).

Opening statements are not evidence, nor is evidence presented during an opening statement. Nor are closing arguments evidence.

(And if you are still puzzled, trial judges so instruct juries.)

However, the exhibits of the placement of the duct tape, to which she refers, ARE evidence.

Thanks, hon!

Nighties, loves! Bed is calling!

 

[JBean]

The IF question was in reference to the premedition part, not a question as to whether or not she died from asphyxiation. Semantics.

If I ever kill someone, I hope you are on the jury. But this is not going to happen in my lifetime, nor yours.

But that is an important disctinction. IF (as you say) it was not premeditated or if there is no proof it was premditated then the current charges are not proven. It is subtle but huge.

 

[JBean]

I'll look it up. Posting prior to save others the effort. Will edit in a few if it's there.

Thanks Lin, I am trying to determine if Huck was charged with the same premeditated charges as KC Murder 782.04 1(a)1.or if he was charged with Murder 782.04 1(a)2

 

[JBean]

I'll look it up. Posting prior to save others the effort. Will edit in a few if it's there.

ETA: It appears to me that he was initially charged with felony murder with the kidnapping as the predicate or underlying felony.

One may verify this by searching here.

2nd ETA: Felony murder is a capital offense; don't want anyone confused by reading 'capital murder.'

Thanks. So his charges were different than KC's. Thanks.

 

[lin]

Thanks Lin, I am trying to determine if Huck was charged with the same premeditated charges as KC Murder 782.04 1(a)1.or if he was charged with Murder 782.04 1(a)2

It doesn't appear that he was charged with premeditation nor does my recollection of the facts of that case support it but it's been a while since I've read it, so could be wrong. I edited and added link above for reference but there's really not much there to read.

 

[RR0004]

Ok...let's back this up a sec...if the tape wasn't put on Caylee for the purpose of killing her...then what was it put there for? If it was to keep her quiet as some have suggested, doesn't it's meer placement over her nose/mouth constitute abuse? Did she not die?

 

[Wudge]

Respectfully, do you think she's guilty?

I was assuming you did (really)...so how would you present the evidence to the jury so that they clearly hear it?

ETA: Oh...and what the heck does titcr mean?

This is a discussion on 1st degree murder -- a capital murder case as well. Against that, my answer to your question is: No. Why? Because the evidence we know of is insufficient to hurdle our proof beyond a reasonable doubt standard, much less hurdle our lingering doubt standard for the death penalty.

I will further add that the lack of sufficient evidence to support murder one is all that I am able to functionally assess at this time.

ETA: TITCR = This is the credited response.

 

[JBean]

This is a discussion on 1st degree murder -- a capital murder case as well. Against that, my answer to your question is: No. Why? Because the evidence we know of is insufficient to hurdle our proof beyond a reasonable doubt standard, much less hurdle our lingering doubt standard for the death penalty.

I will further add that the lack of sufficient of the evidence to support murder one is all that I am able to functionally assess at this time.

Wudge, do you think the evidence to date supports any other murder or manslaughter charge?

 

[lin]

Thanks. So his charges were different than KC's. Thanks.

While that's an important distinction and while most of the facts of the cases are different, what I think many here are trying to convey is that one relevant fact is the same: Use of duct tape that the perp alleged was post mortem. The opinion of the 5th DCA will be hard for any other court to ignore on that fact common to both cases. To my reading of Huck and my knowledge of the Caylee case, the facts here are much more compelling and as I posted earlier, KC can't even throw out that 'atypical consensual sex' thing as Huck tried. (And failed.) The victim in Huck was an adult and may have been in the company of anyone else in the world, while Caylee was but a two year old baby totally under her mother's care and control; etc. etc. etc.

 

[JBean]

It doesn't appear that he was charged with premeditation nor does my recollection of the facts of that case support it but it's been a while since I've read it, so could be wrong. I edited and added link above for reference but there's really not much there to read.

Interesting, thanks for your research. So I think the ME testified that she most likely died of asphyxiation from the tape? I wonder why he wasn't charged with premeditation? or was the kidnapping obvious and so it was easier to charge Felony Murder?
Oh well OT better not go too far afield.
thanks again.

 

[RR0004]

This is a discussion on 1st degree murder -- a capital murder case as well. Against that, my answer to your question is: No. Why? Because the evidence we know of is insufficient to hurdle our proof beyond a reasonable doubt standard, much less hurdle our lingering doubt standard for the death penalty.

I will further add that the lack of sufficient evidence to support murder one is all that I am able to functionally assess at this time.

ETA: TITCR = This is the credited response.

Oh, I'm sorry...I wasn't referring to her being guilty of this charge...but guilty in general. What evidence do you think may be coming that will substantiate the charges? I mean, assuming the SA's office knows what they're doing.

 

[Wudge]

Wudge, do you think the evidence to date supports any other murder or manslaughter charge?

No. Because to functionally assess those charges, we need to assess the defense's case-in-chief, which we can't do before the trial.

 

[lin]

No...I doubt the SA will make that claim...I think they may submit the tape over her mouth and nose for consideration...but as the ME has stated they cannot determine a cause of death...the SA will not say that she died from asphyxiation as a fact.

While Dr. G. will not likely testify that death was caused by asphyxiation to a degree of medical certainty, she may very well opine that it was the likely cause of death, imo.

 

[JBean]

No. Because to functionally assess those charges, we need to assess the defense's case-in-chief, which we can't do before the trial.

True enough and I cannot argue with that at all.

 

[Wudge]

Oh, I'm sorry...I wasn't referring to her being guilty of this charge...but guilty in general. What evidence do you think may be coming that will substantiate the charges? I mean, assuming the SA's office knows what they're doing.

I don't mean to make this sound strident or harsh, but there is no such thing as "guilty in general".

I have no idea what happened, and I'm not sure that anyone else has any clearer idea of what happened than I do.

(Read through this forum, there are hundreds, if not thousands of notions and hypos as to what happened (transpired). In turn, this immense difference of opinion (ideas) represents almost no certainty whatsover.)

 

[JBean]

While that's an important distinction and while most of the facts of the cases are different, what I think many here are trying to convey is that one relevant fact is the same: Use of duct tape that the perp alleged was post mortem. The opinion of the 5th DCA will be hard for any other court to ignore on that fact common to both cases. To my reading of Huck and my knowledge of the Caylee case, the facts here are much more compelling and as I posted earlier, KC can't even throw out that 'atypical consensual sex' thing as Huck tried. (And failed.) The victim in Huck was an adult and may have been in the company of anyone else in the world, while Caylee was but a two year old baby totally under her mother's care and control; etc. etc. etc.

Oh I totally understand. I wasn't drawing any conclusions;just gathering data.

 

[lin]

Interesting, thanks for your research. So I think the ME testified that she most likely died of asphyxiation from the tape? I wonder why he wasn't charged with premeditation? or was the kidnapping obvious and so it was easier to charge Felony Murder?
Oh well OT better not go too far afield.
thanks again.

I like where you're going with this but agree it could get us way o/t so will try to be careful.

Without re-reading the case, going strictly from memory, I think the big difference is that the Huck victim was an adult and it was reasonable that she agreed to be with Huck at some point in time, before things changed to kidnap. It's reasonable that he didn't set out to murder her but in the course of a disagreement or argument, maybe about her being unwilling to continue their discussions, he murdered her. None of those things apply to Caylee who had no choice about being with her mother and who was totally dependent on her mother, etc. hence the premeditated murder indictment against KC. Well, that and a lot of other things resulted in KC's indictment.

ETA: The victim in Huck could have died from drowning; wasn't conclusive the tape caused death but imo it's reasonable to conclude death was intended. So your initial suggestion of an easier case to try is probably the correct assessment of why felony murder. I had forgotten the COD; oops.