The Felony Murder Rule is CRAP

Yeah, the felony murder rule might seem like such a good idea in your crim. law text book, but when it is put into action...it kinda sucks. Sucks balls actually.

There are two cases RIGHT NOW that are being deliberated by juries in Contra Costa County and San Francisco County Superior Courts that deal with the felony murder rule. They are both heartwrenchingly sad.

Case one. The Defendant is charged under the CA Provocation Act with the murder of his TWO BEST FRIENDS. The defendant and his two best friends (3 African Americans) broke into a man's house, none of them had guns or anything btw. So the owner, an white man shot and killed two of the boys and the defendant is getting charged with it. Dude ain't even have a GUN and he is charged with the murder of his two best friends. I just cannot handle that. He has to be reminded every day that he goes to court of what happened, and then get BLAMED for their death? Just because the shooter has an "affirmative defense" doesn't mean ole boy that never even had a gun at that time should take the fall. That is straight up TRASH.

Case two. The defendant is charged with murder under the felony murder rule. Last year in 2007, he was on trial simply for murder, which was declared a mistrial (7 non guilty, 5 guilty). The DA's office totally revamped their plan and decided to go for the felony murder route. Basically, it was a drug deal gone bad, one person was killed and some weed came up missing. Perfect circumstance for felony murder. There is NO DNA linking him to the crime, there is nothing. Nothing but some phone records that he talked to the drug dealers. I mean there is absolutely NO PROOF of anything. BUT they believe that he was part of the "robbery" that resulted in a death. Biggest crock of shit I have ever heard.

Wait! There's more! So in the previous trial, dudes co-defendant admitted that he shot the person that got shock HOWEVER it was deemed inadmissible in court. Basically, that information could not go to the jury because of the way it was presented. Which is boo-boo. And the co-defendant is a career criminal who is currently in jail RIGHT DAMN NOW for torturing a mother and a daughter. WTF?

Yeah, I know the felony murder rule is supposed to serve as a deterrent to criminal activity... but most of the time, as is illustrated by these two cases its used as something when you can't find anyone else to charge and you are trying to charge someone. So unfair and sad. Are they trying to make an example? What the hell is going on?

And let me say, putting either of these two young men is NOT going to bring back the deceased people. It simply is not. I know they want to put someone in jail, but is it really fair to put someone who is soooo removed from the actual killing in jail? I don't think so.

And I do not cry much, but if either of these two are found guilty, Imma flip out. These dudes are around my age and their lives are OVER because of something they didn't do. Something that happened 3 years ago, and because of a poor choice in judgment, they are suffering for the rest of their lives.

So I REALLY know now that criminal law is not for me. I get way to emotional. I mean, I don't know either of these young men, but I feel for them and will be personally hurt, and maybe even a little distraught if either one is convicted. I'm so upsettable right now...