We’ve posted bizarre stories like this before. No wonder the world thinks we’ve gone nuts. I can’t think of a single, useful justification for punishing someone who wasn’t directly involved in a crime. How does it deter anyone from facilitating a crime they don’t know is going to happen? It’s punishment for not being able to tell the future. ‘Facilitating’ can mean anything the prosecutor wants it to mean. Whoever made the sandwich the killer ate at lunch facilitated his having the energy to do the killing later, right?
To provide equal justice, I guess that means we should prosecute Bush when atrocities are committed by soldiers in Iraq since he sent them there, with guns no less.
Serving Life for Providing Car to Killers
Early in the morning of March 10, 2003, after a raucous party that lasted into the small hours, a groggy and hungover 20-year-old named Ryan Holle lent his Chevrolet Metro to a friend. That decision, prosecutors later said, was tantamount to murder.
The friend used the car to drive three men to the Pensacola home of a marijuana dealer, aiming to steal a safe. The burglary turned violent, and one of the men killed the dealer’s 18-year-old daughter by beating her head in with a shotgun he found in the home.
Mr. Holle was a mile and a half away, but that did not matter.
He was convicted of murder under a distinctively American legal doctrine that makes accomplices as liable as the actual killer for murders committed during felonies like burglaries, rapes and robberies.
Key question: “Did he know they planned to rob someone?”
I hate lawyers, most especially prosecutors. That is were little baby fascists politicians are born.
#1: That’s not the right question. He was convicted of murder. The right question is, did he know they were going to commit murder? If he didn’t, then there was no intent or knowledge on his part to commit murder. And, again, if he didn’t know what was going to happen, you are essentially convicting him for not knowing the future.
First, it is hardly and USAian only law. Many countries have laws that in one way or another acknowledge as a crime being a non-participating accessory. What is required to live up to the spirit and the letter of the law but it basically comes down to and act or even the omission of an act by the accused that aids in the commission of a crime.
Many jurisdictions have removed felony murder from the list of crimes where an accomplice can be charged.
This is a legislative issue and will vary state by state in the US. And if you feel strongly enough about it feel free to lobby for a change in the law.
And Phillep your question is exactly right. and TFA says this to answer it. So there is little doubt that he was an accomplice.
“Mr. Holle, who had given the police a series of statements in which he seemed to admit knowing about the burglary, was convicted of first-degree murder.”
>>That’s not the right question.
I think it is. If he knew in advance about the robbery (which the article implies he did), he was an accomplice in the robbery-gone-bad, which makes him guilty of felony murder. I’ll bet even the murderers themselves did not know in advance that a murder was going to take place, but that doesn’t absolve them from guilt in the murder.
The law may not be right, but that’s what it is.
Uncle Dave you are wrong on that. The guy that pulled the trigger may not have known that he was going to kill someone that night. But he committed a murder in the act of committing a felony and that is first-degree murder in most jurisdictions.
Let me give you another example. A very good friend of mine and his father were in Kentucky for a horse race. While riding in a cab the cab was hit by a couple of guys that had just robbed a C-store and ran a stop light during the get-away. My friend’s father died. The two guys were charged and convicted of first degree murder under the felony murder laws.
Had they barrowed the car from someone that knew they were going to use it to commit the robbery that person could have been charged as well.
From the article, there’s no reason to believe he even knew where the others were going, much less that the plan was to rob the safe. More likely they told him they were going on a pot run.
This is yet another case that should have been dealt with by jury nullification.*
When I’ve been on jury duty, I’ve told judges that I won’t convict anyone for being an accomplice or for conspiracy, except under circumstances where the accused would have committed the crime alone. A better strategy would of course be to not mention this to the judge, but vote not guilty. The only reason I haven’t done this is that it involves telling a lie to the judge and lawyers, and I have a moral problem with that as well.
* Well, perhaps not actual nullification in which the jury in effect strikes down an unjust law, but at least 12 votes of not-guilty by reason of idiotic charges.
#4 – First, it is hardly and USAian only law. Many countries have laws that in one way or another acknowledge as a crime being a non-participating accessory.
Hell… In Saudi Arabia, it is illegal for a woman to be a victim of rape. At least we haven’t become that bad yet.
Yes… I know the guy knew about the intent to rob the dealer, but still, this is another prosecutor looking for a notch on a bedpost. The guy is guilty of something, but not murder.
But who cares? We are a society based on vengeance over justice, so I guess this is to be expected.
#7 – The only reason I haven’t done this is that it involves telling a lie to the judge and lawyers, and I have a moral problem with that as well.
Funny… They have no problem lying to you.
So does facilitating any crime make you guilty of any greater crimes that may result?
What if I loan my shoes to a man who is going to shoplift some food? While he’s shoplifting, he gets caught and kills someone. Am I a murderer for loaning him my shoes?
I stopped reading when you accused our soldiers of committing “atrocities” in Iraq. Sorry, that kind of flagrantly ignorant, spiteful and stupid misinformation isn’t my cup of tea. Bunch of Farenheit 911 kids.
“Robbery” presumes violence may well occur. An accomplice before the fact should be held responsible to some degree, but the appropriate punishment would have been a couple years in jail, at most.
Not life. Not without a lot more knowledge and participation on his part, or a record of knowing the others did this sort of thing before.
I don’t know how anybody in their right mind based on the article can defend that Ryan Holle deserves a sentence of life with no parole.
At the most he could be charged for lending the car to be used in burglary. And even then I think the case is thin. After all, in the article Ryan Holle describes he thought it was a joke. Also he was somewhat drunk and tired. On top of that he had lend his car many times to that same person – probably with no murders occuring.
I like the US. But lunacy is rampant. Common sense has disappeared.
you are missing the point…he was dark skin’ted, and I’ll BET he was relying on the public/private defender system for his defense. If you can’t afford an attorney, yada yada, well, unless you CAN afford an attorney you can’t get a decent legal defense. Court costs $$$, attorneys cost lots of $$$. If you have $$$$, can hire a good, competent attorney, THEN you have the ability to win. If you don’t, AND you’re a shade less than pale, there is no such thing as justice. Face it. That is the truth, at the moment.
Why is it that the DA’s have all the budget, while the Public Defenders/Private Defenders are struggling by on wages that could only be coveted by a public school teacher? They are consistently underfunded, with a very high turn over rate. It’s not like law schools REQUIRE that lawyers do a stint as a public defender for graduation….so, it’s just the idealists, and the “d” students who end up there. (Guess who stays?)
Doesn’t need to make sense. That’s how it is.
#7 “From the article, there’s no reason to believe he even knew where the others were going, much less that the plan was to rob the safe. More likely they told him they were going on a pot run. ”
Well you obviously didn’t read TFA.
As in the article and either quoted or referred to in a number of posts above you…
“Mr. Holle, who had given the police a series of statements in which he seemed to admit knowing about the burglary, was convicted of first-degree murder.”
#10 wrote: “What if I loan my shoes to a man who is going to shoplift some food? While he’s shoplifting, he gets caught and kills someone. Am I a murderer for loaning him my shoes?”
If the man told you he was going to use your shoes to commit the crime, yes. You would be guilty of shoplifting and if he killed someone during the commission of the crime you’d be guilty of felony murder.
Remember the Oklahoma City Bombing?, nut-job McVeigh told that Fortier kid he wanted to blow up a federal building and Fortier was found guilty of not reporting him, he thought McVeigh was a kook blowing off steam, he did not help facilitate the crime but they still sent him up.
He seems to have known that the vehicle was going to be used to commit a crime, so he facilitated the crime and is GUILTY.
The punishment may be harsh though, he deserves life with the possibility of parole.
i recently saw a line in someone else’s blog that really crystallized for me what lawyers do in today’s day and age:
“Contemporary lawyering is often an expensive form of childish game-playing with the rules of civil procedure. It’s psychological warfare for minute tactical advantage.”
i would imagine this applies to criminal law as well. when, exactly, was common sense assassinated in this country?
8 OFTLO. “We are a society based on vengeance over justice, so I guess this is to be expected.”
Does discouraging the murder of innocents fit into that definition too?
RBG
Come on Dvorak, I listen to Cranky Geeks and enjoy your crankiness and I assume the rant was more for entertainment and rabble rousing than to be informative. You know our system of law comes from and has been developed through English Common Law and to pull out the “Oh the world must think we’re crazy” means you haven’t been reading the papers. Do you really equate our system with Saudi Arabia and lashes and jail time for the rape victim or the Sudan Teddy Bear crisis? In our system if you provide material and knowing assistance in the commission of a crime then you are an accessory to that crime. Makes sense to me and the law.
The people wanted a scapegoat and the DA wants a political future.
Contrast this to the case of the man in Texas who went outside with his shotgun, against the commands of the 911 operator, and killed two men who were robbing the house next door. It is very unlikely he will even be arrested let alone convicted of a crime.
http://tinyurl.com/3yv8wq
“Horn, 61, had phoned police when he saw two men break into his neighbor’s suburban Houston home through a window in broad daylight. Now they were getting away with a bag of loot.
“Don’t go outside the house,” the 911 operator pleaded. “You’re going to get yourself shot if you go outside that house with a gun. I don’t care what you think.”
“You want to make a bet?” Horn answered. “I’m going to kill them.”
He did.”
#11 I stopped reading when you accused our soldiers of committing “atrocities” in Iraq.
Just for my information, are you saying that US soldiers have not committed any atrocities in Iraq?
#11 – Whatever Joel… Are you suggesting Americans in Iraq are all just squeaky clean cherub faced angels who say “Gee whiz” and share apple pie with the locals?
Atrocities have been committed. They are pretty well documented and your willful ignorance won’t change that.
#20 – 8 OFTLO. “We are a society based on vengeance over justice, so I guess this is to be expected.”
Does discouraging the murder of innocents fit into that definition too?
Grind that axe in an appropriate thread.
I know you get the Partnership For A Drug Free America newsletter and all, but that’s just propaganda, and unrelated to this issue.
27 OFTLO. You lost me there. You’re saying this thread is about vengeance. I’m saying this thread is about attempting to save lives, like the girl who was murdered in this story.
RBG
This is the sort of story that makes the U.S. the laughing stock of civilised democracies. Amazing.
So if the guy had taken public transportation would the whole city have been arrested?
I don’t think he deserves life. However, willingly loaning your car for the commission of a robbery where you homeboyz are armed ain’t a nice thing to do. One of the fools bashed in an 18 month old’s head! This sucker needs to spend at least a decade in the pen.
Three guys, a driver and two gunmen attempt to rob a bank. The gunmen go into the bank. An armed security guard kills both of the robbers. The getaway driver is arrested and charged with two counts of murder.
Works for me.
Perry