Felony Murder Vs Premeditated Murder

[marspiter]

As an aside, it is important to point out that ,as I understand it,the SA still needs to request that FM be considered with the jury instructions. IOW, it is not automagically considered as an LIO might be.
Is that correct?

Yes I believe that is correct. I think the SA has to ask for it and that it's not automatic. Maybe someone more familiar could answer better then myself.

Also as I understand it the jury can be devided between murder 1 and 1st degree felony murder and a conviction can still be handed down. Which would also relate as to why the punishment for both would be the same. Once again if someone with more knowledge would like to comment.

 

[Just Jayla]

I know this has already been posted in this thread about 3 times, but:

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=Ch0782/SEC04.HTM

782.04(1)(a)(2)(h): "The unlawful killing of a human being...[w]hen committed by a person engaged in the perpetration of, or in the attempt to perpetrate, any...[a]ggravated child abuse [or other listed felony]...is murder in the first degree and constitutes a capital felony, punishable as provided in s. 775.082."

775.082(1): "A person who has been convicted of a capital felony shall be punished by death if the proceeding held to determine sentence according to the procedure set forth in s. 921.141 results in findings by the court that such person shall be punished by death, otherwise such person shall be punished by life imprisonment and shall be ineligible for parole."

ETA: Sorry for the cross-post, impatientredhead. O/T, I'm an impatient redhead too.

Funny, I pictured you as a having kind of punk-chic, black pixie hair.... and wearing a sensible yet stylish red trench coat!

ETA-Oh my-Based on my avatar, what does that say about me?

 

[Just Jayla]

(Snappy salute)

I also believe that Casey would have had to hold Caylee down so as to prevent her from tearing off the duct tape. If Casey desired to commit a premediated murder in that fashion (suffocation), she could have simply drowned Caylee in a swimming pool and claimed that she died accidentally.

The fact that she did not simply drown Caylee, but may have utilized a more combative and hands-on method can lead one to think that KC did this in anger and it was very personal to her. A vendetta, maybe.
If the defense is going to point to KC's home life as a mitigating circumstance, which I think they should (CA has given the defense some good material), then the state better get on board in framing the mother/daughter relationship as an aggravating circumstance-KC used hands-on methods because she was spiteful towards her mother.

 

[elementary]

The fact that she did not simply drown Caylee, but may have utilized a more combative and hands-on method can lead one to think that KC did this in anger and it was very personal to her. A vendetta, maybe.
If the defense is going to point to KC's home life as a mitigating circumstance, which I think they should (CA has given the defense some good material), then the state better get on board in framing the mother/daughter relationship as an aggravating circumstance-KC used hands-on methods because she was spiteful towards her mother.

I posted in the Andrea Lyon thread regarding her infamous speech. I mentioned that the beauty of her DP 'mitigating circumstances' defence is that she can point out that the perp "learned this at her mother's knee" (given that we have evidence of what her mother's behaviour is like). This is a reasonable counterpoint to that, IMO. Kudos!

 

[Just Jayla]

I posted in the Andrea Lyon thread regarding her infamous speech. I mentioned that the beauty of her DP 'mitigating circumstances' defence is that she can point out that the perp "learned this at her mother's knee" (given that we have evidence of what her mother's behaviour is like). This is a reasonable counterpoint to that, IMO. Kudos!

There are a few good moments that we have seen and read between KC and CA that can be helpful, maybe to either side:

-Deb & RichGrund stating that KC did not seem to like her parents, said she did not want to be like her mother
-JG stating that sometimes she wanted to be just like her mother, other times she hated her mother
-JG stating that CA tore KC a new one the night KC and JG were on the bed together, to the point where JG had to later come to KC's defense
-LA's statements to LE regarding the degrading relationship between mother and daughter, and the snippy comments they would exchange regarding events at Caylee's birth
-AD's recollection that CA would call KC constantly while she was out
-CA was moving away and KC would get the house

-(This one is my purest speculation) KC's resent at not being able to commit infanticide as possibly planned. Some studies link concealed/denied pregnancies with infanticide. Not that this would be brought up at trial, just something the jury could ponder after hearing RickP.

KC could not wait to get outside those four walls she always felt stuck in-mom was constantly on her about it. KC started ignoring CA's phone calls when she was with TL. I believe CA called KC several times on June 15th and KC let it go to VM...a few hours later, she calls mom to say she was on the way home.

-CA's (recorded) threat on July 16th to take custody of Caylee
-KC's spiteful biatch comment

 

[RR0004]

As many times as it has been debated and the number of people I have annoyed arguing my point I keep that one handy

Yippee...so are we done with this once and for all? (just curious LOL)

 

[RR0004]

As an aside, it is important to point out that ,as I understand it,the SA still needs to request that FM be considered with the jury instructions. IOW, it is not automagically considered as an LIO might be.
Is that correct?

I knew it was too good to be true!

But, I must ***FINALLY*** say I get it!!!

 

[RR0004]

(Snappy salute)

I also believe that Casey would have had to hold Caylee down so as to prevent her from tearing off the duct tape. If Casey desired to commit a premediated murder in that fashion (suffocation), she could have simply drowned Caylee in a swimming pool and claimed that she died accidentally.

...which leads me to believe she didn't commit the crime in her own backyard. She brought her back there, obviously...but she committed the crime elsewhere. Let's say she didn't think by taping Caylee and throwing her in the trunk of the car to go party or hang out with TL she would kill her (at the time more interested in her own gratification), IMO it still clearly establishes neglect resulting in the death of a child under 12. Personally, the more I "speculate", the more I think that may be the best way for the State to go. They have the trunk forensics. They'll work with that. As others have long suspected, Zanny was the car.

 

[JBean]

I knew it was too good to be true!

But, I mu!st ***FINALLY*** say I get it!!!

Haha
Hey it is a great debate that most likely isn't over yet.

It is the topic that brings out all the lurkers and the one thread we love to hate. LOL.

 

[RR0004]

(chuckle)

I've been waiting for the day when someone of prominence would suggest this.


(Say it ain't so Joe.)

Holy moly...are ya thinking George?

 

[impatientredhead]

Yippee...so are we done with this once and for all? (just curious LOL)

LOL- I know I am done with it one way or the other.
It is a good excercise for me in self control.
Now I at least delete my responses after I finish typing out the same thing over and over again. Progress in small steps

Being that the jury does not have to be in agreement on premeditated or felony murder I cannot see a scenario where the state does not request that it be included in the instructions. They will (imho) be instructed on both murder options and then as required they will be provided the lesser charges within each statute.

 

[RR0004]

Haha
Hey it is a great debate that most likely isn't over yet.

It is the topic that brings out all the lurkers and the one thread we love to hate. LOL.

...and great to have RH's input on the whole topic. I think even he may have learned something new tonight.

 

[RR0004]

LOL- I know I am done with it one way or the other.
It is a good excercise for me in self control.
Now I at least delete my responses after I finish typing out the same thing over and over again. Progress in small steps

Being that the jury does not have to be in agreement on premeditated or felony murder I cannot see a scenario where the state does not request that it be included in the instructions. They will (imho) be instructed on both murder options and then as required they will be provided the lesser charges within each statute.

Hey...I'm just happy that I finally get all the statutes. Thanks for all your help (and patience)!

 

[Eidetic]

Holy moly...are ya thinking George?

So for players we have papa George, didn't George also mention Lee was thinking of going in LE? Jessie was headed the way of LE. Casey had the ex that was LE...
Get ready to put all the donkeys in a circle and grab a blindfold for the defense when the RK defamation dust settles.

 

[cyberborg]

...and great to have RH's input on the whole topic. I think even he may have learned something new tonight.

WS will have attorney's from all over signing up to join to test their theories as trial balloons with the members and to surface new ideas from the brainstorming ..... :dance: To be successful it needs the structure of a well moderated forum with a well organized sleuthing membership, like WS.

 

[Wudge]

Felony murder isn't applied to "any" felony. It is usually the ones in Florida's statutory list. The states may vary a little, but probably not much.

Anyway, they would be "equal" because "capital felony" and "availability of the death penalty for 'felony murder'" is the same. They are all statutory in nature, the penalty for a "capital" crime and "availability of the death penalty" are exactly the same -- death. Dead is dead. No difference that I can see. None.

Obviously, a limited number of felonies are covered in statute 782.04, not all felonies If 'capital felony' is the same as 'felony murder', what statute provides for the death penalty for felonies not covered in statute 782.04?

 

[Just Jayla]

...which leads me to believe she didn't commit the crime in her own backyard. She brought her back there, obviously...but she committed the crime elsewhere. Let's say she didn't think by taping Caylee and throwing her in the trunk of the car to go party or hang out with TL she would kill her (at the time more interested in her own gratification), IMO it still clearly establishes neglect resulting in the death of a child under 12. Personally, the more I "speculate", the more I think that may be the best way for the State to go. They have the trunk forensics. They'll work with that. As others have long suspected, Zanny was the car.

BBM-To me, this would constitute aggravated child abuse.....you don't put duct tape around a child's head and in her hair, it's abusive....even if KC did not consider it child abuse, she purposefully obstructed Caylee's airways (might as well put a plastic bag over her head and hope she can breathe like that).....KC's ignorance of the law does not mean "not guilty."

 

[marspiter]

Obviously, a limited number of felonies are covered in statute 782.04, not all felonies If 'capital felony' is the same as 'felony murder', what statute provides for the death penalty for felonies not covered in statute 782.04?

Here is the list of felonies.

2. When committed by a person engaged in the perpetration of, or in the attempt to perpetrate, any:

a. Trafficking offense prohibited by s. 893.135(1),

b. Arson,

c. Sexual battery,

d. Robbery,

e. Burglary,

f. Kidnapping,

g. Escape,

h. Aggravated child abuse,

i. Aggravated abuse of an elderly person or disabled adult,

j. Aircraft piracy,

k. Unlawful throwing, placing, or discharging of a destructive device or bomb,

l. Carjacking,

m. Home-invasion robbery,

n. Aggravated stalking,

o. Murder of another human being,

p. Resisting an officer with violence to his or her person,

q. Felony that is an act of terrorism or is in furtherance of an act of terrorism; or

3. Which resulted from the unlawful distribution of any substance controlled under s. 893.03(1), cocaine as described in s. 893.03(2)(a)4., or opium or any synthetic or natural salt, compound, derivative, or preparation of opium by a person 18 years of age or older, when such drug is proven to be the proximate cause of the death of the user,


I don't think anyone was arguing that 1st degree felony murder which has the death penalty available covers all felonies.

Like say something like Wrongful retention of a misplaced card, or Larceny by employee. I seriously doubt anyone is trying to argue that felonies of that nature would carry the death penalty. Also it was made clear that according to Edmund v Florida that was cited that the felony had to cause the direct death of the victim.

The clear argument was that 1st degree felony murder according to Florida carries the death penalty. For ease of typing the 1st degree part has been left out by some but I thinks it's pretty clear what the discussion is about. Also with all the citation that has been linked showing it's availability, I think it was pretty clear.

Florida lays out felony murder in levels like it does it's regular murder charges. They do not use a blanket felony murder rule like one would find on say wikipedia. It's been made pretty clear that the prosecution in this case could ask for 1st degree felony murder based on the aggravated child abuse charge. Have they done it yet? No but that doesn't mean they can't. Two entirely different things. Just because they haven't does not mean they can't.

After seeing Themis' post I now believe as we get closer to trial or when ever the cut off is for adding it to the jury instructions we will see the SA ask for it. It's pretty much a win win for the prosecution.

 

[Wudge]

SNIP

I don't think anyone was arguing that 1st degree felony murder which has the death penalty available covers all felonies.

SNIP

The clear argument was that 1st degree felony murder according to Florida carries the death penalty.

My point has been and remains that the death penalty is not currently available in Florida for felony murder, only for 'capital felonies' as enumerated in 782.04. Moreover, the availability of the death penalty for a 'capital felony' is certainly not the same as having the death penalty available for 'felony murder'.

Regarding who has been arguing it, you have -- amongst other posters. As you just made clear in this post of yours. To wit: "The clear argument was that 1st degree felony murder according to Florida carries the death penalty."

That has indeed been the argument. You just made it again, which is: false. Please take special note that you equate felony murder to capital felony. They are not the same.

HTH

 

[marspiter]

Once again I don't think your actually reading the citations provided to you on this topic. Notice the bolded area. It is stated as "Felony Murder" of the first degree. It is as you can see by the Florida Supreme Court citation here linked to 782.04 (1)

http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/jury_instructions/instructions.shtml#


7.3 FELONY MURDER — FIRST DEGREE
§ 782.04(1)(a), Fla.Stat.

To prove the crime of First Degree Felony Murder, the State must prove the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

1. (Victim) is dead.

Give 2a, 2b, or 2c as applicable.
2. a. [The death occurred as a consequence of and while (defendant) was engaged in the commission of (crime alleged).]

b. [The death occurred as a consequence of and while (defendant) was attempting to commit (crime alleged).]

c. [The death occurred as a consequence of and while (defendant), or an accomplice, was escaping from the immediate scene of (crime alleged).]

Give 3a if defendant actual perpetrator.
3. a. [(Defendant) was the person who actually killed (victim).]

Give 3b if defendant not actual perpetrator.
b. [(Victim) was killed by a person other than (defendant); but both (defendant) and the person who killed (victim) were principals in the commission of (crime alleged).]

In order to convict of First Degree Felony Murder, it is not necessary for the State to prove that the defendant had a premeditated design or intent to kill.

1. Define the crime alleged. If Burglary, also define crime that was the object of burglary.

2. If 2b above is given, also define "attempt" (see 5.1).

3. If 3b is given, immediately give principal instruction (3.5(a)).

4. Since the statute does not require its proof, it is not necessary to define "premeditation."

HTH