He *may* not be charged for anything, or could get murder, we'd probably need a little more evidence to decide Big, continue with detailing the entire murder scene, please...
Man, I love Wikipedia!
"An accessory is a person who assists in the commission of a crime, but does not actually participate in the commission of the crime as a joint principal. The distinction between an accessory and a principal is a question of fact and degree"
I'm curious if you're asking if he could be charged with first degree murder or if he could be charged with any of the lesser charges, for example manslaughter? The less serious offense of manslaughter, is the taking of human life but in a manner considered by law as less culpable than murder. Manslaughter is usually broken down into voluntary manslaughter and involuntary manslaughter, distinguished by mens rea, or the state of mind. So I believe that Trotsky could be charged with manslaughter... I may be wrong though.
Lenin would be charged with murder (not manslaughter) cause he clearly had the state of mind to kill Nicholas. Trotsky could be tried for murder too, if felony-murder applies. If felony-murder does not apply, Trotsky would not be charged with murder or manslaughter (cause he didn't kill Nicholas). However, lesser charges, such as robbery or conspiracy could be brought.
I've seen so many cases where a group of kids go into a convenience store to rob it and one pulls a gun and kills the clerk, yet all are charged with murder... so I'm curious what the difference would be?
That's the classic felony-murder scenario.
Last edited by matclone; 04-13-2007 at 05:18 PM.
I guess my thinking in all of this is that he was part of the robbery, which lead to the death of a man. Although, he didn't actually slit the man's throat, he did participate in the event that led to the death, thus making him an accessory.
My thoughts exactly!
Originally Posted by matclone
Yes Elisa but he actually has to have a willing desire to assist to kill Nicholas.
Not if the felony-murder rule applies.
Like I said, it's controversial. To many it doesn't seem fair that Trotsky would be tried for murder. But the rule (where it still applies) derives from our English common law heritage.
Big, your sources may have specified that they were following the modern penal code, in which case felony-murder may not apply.
Last edited by matclone; 04-13-2007 at 05:28 PM.
"The felony murder rule is a legal doctrine current in some common law countries that broadens the crime of murder in two ways. First, when a victim dies accidentally or without specific intent in the course of an applicable felony, it increases what might have been manslaughter (or even a simple tort) to murder. Second, it makes any participant in such a felony criminally responsible for any deaths that occur during or in furtherance of that felony. While there is some debate about the original scope of the rule, modern interpretations typically require that the felony be an obviously dangerous one, or one committed in an obviously dangerous manner. For this reason, the felony murder rule is often justified as a means of deterring dangerous felonies.
Originally Posted by matclone
For example, a getaway driver for an armed robbery can be convicted of murder if one of the robbers killed someone in the process of the robbery, even though the driver was not present at and did not expect the killing. In jurisdictions that also have the death penalty, felony murder usually qualifies as a capital crime; however, there are independent constitutional limitations on the imposition of the death penalty on those guilty of felony murder."
Tags for this Thread