Surprised this hasn’t happened more

[Cheeks]

https://www.apnews.com/6f03105ca6ff4a36bb728626802565eb

Glad they caught him.  Not sure how attempted murder isn’t one of the charges.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

Because it would be an overcharge.

[Cheeks]

Because it would be an overcharge.

If we was successful, he would be charged with murder...yes? 

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

He wasn’t trying to make the plane crash. He was trying to create a problem that would have created overtime for him.

[Cheeks]

He wasn’t trying to make the plane crash. He was trying to create a problem that would have created overtime for him.

Wait....what?  I know that is his claim and defense....but if that plane crashed because he purposefully tried to sabotage it you and I know what the outcome would be.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

Yeah but creating a dangerous situation where someone dies isn’t attempted murder. Trying to kill someone is. He wasn’t trying to kill anyone. At least so far there is no evidence to suggest as such. Maybe some will be found. Until then attempted murder is prosecutorial overreach. We have too much of that as it is.

[jesmu84]

https://www.apnews.com/6f03105ca6ff4a36bb728626802565eb

Glad they caught him.  Not sure how attempted murder isn’t one of the charges.

Doesn't that charge require intent though?

[Cheeks]

Doesn't that charge require intent though?

I don’t know, good question. 

[GooooMarquette]

While the specifics vary by state, murder (or attempted murder) generally requires intent to kill, except in the case of felony murder - generally, killing a person while committing certain felonies.

I don't know the nuances of the law, but I would assuming intentionally damaging a commercial aircraft could very well be a felony, in which case the felony murder rule might overcome the intent requirement.

[ZiggysFryBoy]

Im no lawyer but i would think conspiracy to attempted murder would be a possible charge, which, IIRC, carries the same punishment as attempted murder.

Legal beagles can correct me of I'm wrong.

[forgetful]

Im no lawyer but i would think conspiracy to attempted murder would be a possible charge, which, IIRC, carries the same punishment as attempted murder.

Legal beagles can correct me of I'm wrong.

Not a possible charge. Would require two or more individuals plotting an attempted murder. There were neither two or more people, nor was there a plot to attempt to murder anyone.

[TallTitan34]

The fact there is a charge of “damaging or disabling a plane” would make me think the attempted murder element is assumed in the seriousness of the charge.

[ZiggysFryBoy]

Ok, read the while article.

This guy is a huge dumbass, not a terrorist. Withdrawn prior speculation.

Lock it, this aint going no where good.

[Cheeks]

Ok, read the while article.

This guy is a huge dumbass, not a terrorist. Withdrawn prior speculation.

Lock it, this aint going no where good.

No doubt a dumbass, I am just saying if something catastrophic happened in the air, intent or not, this guy would be seeing the end of times. 

[jesmu84]

No doubt a dumbass, I am just saying if something catastrophic happened in the air, intent or not, this guy would be seeing the end of times.

If an airplane manufacturer were to cut corners, do you think the should/would "be seeing the end of times"?

[muwarrior69]

Im no lawyer but i would think conspiracy to attempted murder would be a possible charge, which, IIRC, carries the same punishment as attempted murder.

Legal beagles can correct me of I'm wrong.

My beagle found that offensive.

[Cheeks]

If an airplane manufacturer were to cut corners, do you think the should/would "be seeing the end of times"?

Cut corners with the intent to sabotage?  Absolutely.  Fortunately there is a built in prevention for this which is profit.  If a manufacturer cut corners knowing it would lead to a crash, they would go out of business.  If you are trying to equate Boeing here I think you are way way off base.

[Pakuni]

Wait....what?  I know that is his claim and defense....but if that plane crashed because he purposefully tried to sabotage it you and I know what the outcome would be.

But the plane didn't crash. You can't charge people with an offense based on what might have happened. to charge someone with attempted murder, you have to prove intent (that, by definition, is what attempt is - the intent to do something. As in, I am attempting to illustrate how you don't understand the law here, though I likely will fail).

Every time someone texts while driving there's a risk they miss a pedestrian in the road and kill him/her. That doesn't mean people who get caught texting while driving ought to be charged with attempted manslaughter.

[Cheeks]

But the plane didn't crash. You can't charge people with an offense based on what might have happened. to charge someone with attempted murder, you have to prove intent (that, by definition, is what attempt is - the intent to do something. As in, I am attempting to illustrate how you don't understand the law here, though I likely will fail).

Every time someone texts while driving there's a risk they miss a pedestrian in the road and kill him/her. That doesn't mean people who get caught texting while driving ought to be charged with attempted manslaughter.

So if someone shoots at someone, misses is it attempted murder?  The plane didn’t crash....ergo the victim wasn’t hit by the bullet.

[forgetful]

So if someone shoots at someone, misses is it attempted murder?  The plane didn’t crash....ergo the victim wasn’t hit by the bullet.

You're missing the key word, "intent". If someone shoots at someone, it is reasonably easy to prove there was an intent to cause serious bodily harm or death.

If they damage an airplane, in a way that experts agree would be very noticeable before takeoff, with the intent of the plane aborting takeoff, it is nearly impossible to prove an intent to cause serious bodily harm or death.

[Pakuni]

So if someone shoots at someone, misses is it attempted murder?  The plane didn’t crash....ergo the victim wasn’t hit by the bullet.

Not always. In fact, nonfatal shootings often don't lead to attempted murder charges, but rather something like aggravated battery with a firearm, because intent can be hard to prove.
That said, when you shoot at someone, it's often  being done with the intent to kill or with the knowledge that death is a probable outcome.
In this airplane mechanic case, there's no evidence the guy intended to kill anyone or a that deadly crash was the probable outcome. Had this not been caught before takeoff, the outcome would have been forcing the pilots to fly manually, not the plane falling out if the sky.

I know you're the expert on all things, Cheeks, but you're way out of your lane here. Federal prosecutors aren't famous for undercharging, you know?

[forgetful]

Not always. In fact, nonfatal shootings often don't lead to attempted murder charges, but rather something like aggravated battery with a firearm, because intent can be hard to prove.

Very good point.

[Hards Alumni]

So if someone shoots at someone, misses is it attempted murder?  The plane didn’t crash....ergo the victim wasn’t hit by the bullet.

Another mountain to die on!

[real chili 83]

Another mountain to die on!

Lots of mountains near the ‘Lectric city, eh?

[mu_hilltopper]

Looks like a lot of Scoopers stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night.