If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(New York Daily News)   Looks like John Hinckley Jr. may be in for some more courtroom time after Reagan press secretary James Brady's death was ruled a homicide   (nydailynews.com) divider line 134
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

4147 clicks; posted to Main » on 08 Aug 2014 at 11:05 PM (5 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



134 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-08-08 08:09:17 PM
THIS is the one we're going with?
 
2014-08-08 08:15:00 PM

fusillade762: THIS is the one we're going with?


Hey... at least it's the same day the news broke

/that's better than usual
 
2014-08-08 08:26:45 PM

MaudlinMutantMollusk: fusillade762: THIS is the one we're going with?

Hey... at least it's the same day the news broke

/that's better than usual


Oh well. I'm sure someone will get with the Jodie Foster jokes forthwith.
 
2014-08-08 08:42:02 PM
33 1/2 years later? Sounds like bullshiat to me.

C'mon, man.
 
2014-08-08 08:51:26 PM

John Buck 41: 33 1/2 years later? Sounds like bullshiat to me.

C'mon, man.


The dude died at age 73...WTF!?!?
 
2014-08-08 08:58:46 PM

slayer199: John Buck 41: 33 1/2 years later? Sounds like bullshiat to me.

C'mon, man.

The dude died at age 73...WTF!?!?


all of that then the fact that Hinkley has already been deemed insane and has lived in an asylum for the past 33 years, if they drag his ass back to court someone should shoot the prosecutor
 
2014-08-08 08:59:55 PM
Wow. Wow. Wow.
 
2014-08-08 09:55:23 PM

slayer199: John Buck 41: 33 1/2 years later? Sounds like bullshiat to me.

C'mon, man.

The dude died at age 73...WTF!?!?


Yeah.

OK, new rule.  If someone shoots you, at least five years have passed, and you make it past the life expectancy based upon your race, gender, and date of birth, no murder charges.

Brady was born in 1940.  Life expectancy for a white male born in 1940 was 62 years old:
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005148.html

He lived to be 73, and 33 years passed between when he was shot, and when he died.  *IF* they charge Hinkley, it's bullshiat.  There was a reason why common law stopped it at a year and a day.

Even just ruling it a homicide is bullshiat, though:  He lived 33 years after he was shot, and he exceeded the life expectancy of his cohort by 11 years.
 
2014-08-08 10:05:24 PM
Must have been an EXTREMELY slow-moving bullet...
 
2014-08-08 10:10:44 PM

fusillade762: Must have been an EXTREMELY slow-moving bullet...


One might call it a...


www.esquire.com
Magic Bullet
 
2014-08-08 10:22:46 PM

dittybopper: slayer199: John Buck 41: 33 1/2 years later? Sounds like bullshiat to me.

C'mon, man.

The dude died at age 73...WTF!?!?

Yeah.

OK, new rule.  If someone shoots you, at least five years have passed, and you make it past the life expectancy based upon your race, gender, and date of birth, no murder charges.

Brady was born in 1940.  Life expectancy for a white male born in 1940 was 62 years old:
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005148.html

He lived to be 73, and 33 years passed between when he was shot, and when he died.  *IF* they charge Hinkley, it's bullshiat.  There was a reason why common law stopped it at a year and a day.

Even just ruling it a homicide is bullshiat, though:  He lived 33 years after he was shot, and he exceeded the life expectancy of his cohort by 11 years.


If he died from complications that only would arise from the shooting, then it's homicide.

For example, say someone shoots you and a small fragment from a bullet remains in your body years later, but once it gets loose it causes you to have a heart attack.  You wouldn't have had the heart attack unless you were shot, so it's homicide.
 
2014-08-08 10:34:46 PM

Lsherm: dittybopper: slayer199: John Buck 41: 33 1/2 years later? Sounds like bullshiat to me.

C'mon, man.

The dude died at age 73...WTF!?!?

Yeah.

OK, new rule.  If someone shoots you, at least five years have passed, and you make it past the life expectancy based upon your race, gender, and date of birth, no murder charges.

Brady was born in 1940.  Life expectancy for a white male born in 1940 was 62 years old:
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005148.html

He lived to be 73, and 33 years passed between when he was shot, and when he died.  *IF* they charge Hinkley, it's bullshiat.  There was a reason why common law stopped it at a year and a day.

Even just ruling it a homicide is bullshiat, though:  He lived 33 years after he was shot, and he exceeded the life expectancy of his cohort by 11 years.

If he died from complications that only would arise from the shooting, then it's homicide.

For example, say someone shoots you and a small fragment from a bullet remains in your body years later, but once it gets loose it causes you to have a heart attack.  You wouldn't have had the heart attack unless you were shot, so it's homicide.


Meh, they haven't released how it is "death from a gunshot wound" and I don't think there's any reasonable excuse to take the almost 60-year-old Hinkley back to court, especially given the fact he was declared insane for the exact incident. In the end, this is just going to be meaningless.
 
2014-08-08 10:35:44 PM
Plus, a reasonable defense attorney would have to ask for a second opinion on cause of death so many years later and at such an advanced age. Any attempt to try Hinkley is a waste of money.
 
2014-08-08 10:40:59 PM

dr_blasto: Plus, a reasonable defense attorney would have to ask for a second opinion on cause of death so many years later and at such an advanced age. Any attempt to try Hinkley is a waste of money.


It's more for the record if his cause of death was actually directly related to the gunshot injury. Brady was obviously permanently damaged by the attack, but until they release the report it's all speculation.

But what the fark is with the Hinkley defenders on Fark? Do liberals hate Reagan that much?
 
2014-08-08 10:45:55 PM
HE SHOT ST. RONALD! HANG THE BASTARD!
 
2014-08-08 10:47:34 PM

Lsherm: If he died from complications that only would arise from the shooting, then it's homicide.

For example, say someone shoots you and a small fragment from a bullet remains in your body years later, but once it gets loose it causes you to have a heart attack.  You wouldn't have had the heart attack unless you were shot, so it's homicide.


Thirty-three years later?

Sorry, just doesn't fly.  I could see 5 years, maybe stretch it out to 10.  But there is no reason to think that Brady would have lived any longer than he did had he not been shot.  And there is reason to think a typical jury wouldn't buy it either:

In 2007, a Pennsylvania man who had served 16 years for shooting a police officer in 1966 was arrested again and charged with murder after the officer's death, which was ruled a homicide based on the bullet wound 41 years earlier. The man was tried by a jury and acquitted.

Again, there was a reason why, in common law, if the victim lived for more than a year after the assault, that it couldn't be ruled a homicide.  Just common sense, really.  And I've got no problem extending that, because we're really good at keeping people alive these days, but not extending it indefinitely, and certainly not 11 years past the expected lifespan at birth.
 
2014-08-08 10:50:15 PM

dr_blasto: Meh, they haven't released how it is "death from a gunshot wound" and I don't think there's any reasonable excuse to take the almost 60-year-old Hinkley back to court, especially given the fact he was declared insane for the exact incident. In the end, this is just going to be meaningless.


dr_blasto: Plus, a reasonable defense attorney would have to ask for a second opinion on cause of death so many years later and at such an advanced age. Any attempt to try Hinkley is a waste of money.


Will NOT stop them.

THe Hinkley verdict pissed off so many GOPers that the laws were changed so that the insanity plea is almost unwinnable now.

They have had a hard on for this crazy loser for 30 plus years, and they are masturbating droolingly in the corner with the chance to sentence him to death.
 
2014-08-08 10:54:04 PM

Lsherm: But what the fark is with the Hinkley defenders on Fark? Do liberals hate Reagan that much?


I don't think it's so much people defending Hinckley, as attacking the idea that a person should be tried for murder when the victim died 33 years after the incident.
 
2014-08-08 10:56:00 PM

dittybopper: Lsherm: If he died from complications that only would arise from the shooting, then it's homicide.

For example, say someone shoots you and a small fragment from a bullet remains in your body years later, but once it gets loose it causes you to have a heart attack.  You wouldn't have had the heart attack unless you were shot, so it's homicide.

Thirty-three years later?

Sorry, just doesn't fly.  I could see 5 years, maybe stretch it out to 10.  But there is no reason to think that Brady would have lived any longer than he did had he not been shot.  And there is reason to think a typical jury wouldn't buy it either:

In 2007, a Pennsylvania man who had served 16 years for shooting a police officer in 1966 was arrested again and charged with murder after the officer's death, which was ruled a homicide based on the bullet wound 41 years earlier. The man was tried by a jury and acquitted.

Again, there was a reason why, in common law, if the victim lived for more than a year after the assault, that it couldn't be ruled a homicide.  Just common sense, really.  And I've got no problem extending that, because we're really good at keeping people alive these days, but not extending it indefinitely, and certainly not 11 years past the expected lifespan at birth.


It all depends. And depends.

But if Brady died directly as a result of an complication from getting shot, then it's fair game.  This isn't new in the US justice system.  If you shoot someone, they fall into a coma and then die years later, you're on the hook for homicide.

Again I have to ask, why are Fark liberals so adamant about defending Hinkley.  Did he reach hero status somehow?
 
2014-08-08 10:56:37 PM

dittybopper: Lsherm: But what the fark is with the Hinkley defenders on Fark? Do liberals hate Reagan that much?

I don't think it's so much people defending Hinckley, as attacking the idea that a person should be tried for murder when the victim died 33 years after the incident.


It happens all the time.
 
2014-08-08 11:08:24 PM
Idiotic.
 
2014-08-08 11:08:39 PM
This could drive a guy over the edge.

Wait, wut?
 
2014-08-08 11:09:37 PM

dittybopper: Lsherm: But what the fark is with the Hinkley defenders on Fark? Do liberals hate Reagan that much?

I don't think it's so much people defending Hinckley, as attacking the idea that a person should be tried for murder when the victim died 33 years after the incident.


I'm as non-liberal when it comes to crime (and some other issues) as anyone, but the idea that Hinckley is to blame for the death of this man is laughable.
 
2014-08-08 11:09:50 PM
So, how much money will they waste prosecuting a guy that's going to be followed by the system for the rest of his life?
 
2014-08-08 11:11:14 PM
It's been a bad couple of years for Hinkley, first Jodie Foster announces she's playing for the othe team and now this!
 
2014-08-08 11:11:58 PM
Wouldn't this be what they call double jeopardy?
 
2014-08-08 11:15:29 PM
why are Fark liberals so adamant about defending Hinkley

Well...there you go again.

Also:

i.imgur.com
 
2014-08-08 11:16:14 PM
It's a circus paid for by your tax money so you should at least smile and act like you are enjoying it
 
2014-08-08 11:16:47 PM
I can't wait to see the proximate cause argument from the prosecution.
 
2014-08-08 11:17:04 PM
Doesn't this get into double jeopardy territory?

Anyhow. Timothy McVeigh was executed by federal authorities in a state without capital punishment. The county coroner ruled it a homicide.

And I guess any time a coroner looks into a case where someone dies due to the action of another it becomes homicide, just definitionally. A justified homicide is still homicide. A man dying from injuries sustained in war 30 years might also qualify. It's a coroner report, not an indictment.
 
2014-08-08 11:17:09 PM
They wouldn't follow up on something like this if Brady was not only a well known man but also the champion of  gun control.
 
2014-08-08 11:17:27 PM

VelcroFez: Wow. Wow. Wow.


Modified wooden toilet roller?
 
2014-08-08 11:18:14 PM
Here's the gory of a man named Brady.
 
2014-08-08 11:18:15 PM

texdent: Wouldn't this be what they call double jeopardy?


No, since the original charge was something other than murder.  As far as I understand it, if circumstances change following a trial (e.g., the victim, who was alive at the time of the trial, dies), you can be charged with something else.
 
2014-08-08 11:20:54 PM
"John, I like women. It was never going to happen. Sorry."
thumbnails102.imagebam.com
 
2014-08-08 11:21:35 PM

gameshowhost: I can't wait to see the proximate cause argument from the prosecution.


"What I was, I am not now," Brady said at the time. "What I was, I will never be again."
 
2014-08-08 11:21:44 PM
I'm not going to pretend to be a magic wizard with all the answers and exact dates and times and all that jazz, but this whole thing just feels wrong. The victim lived probably longer than most people of his generation, and the crime took place so long ago, that it just doesn't seem quite right to blame the gunshot. I mean, people gotta die sometime. And as things go, this was a respectable life span.

If I were to die now as a result of an infection I got 30+ years ago from stepping on a nail at my uncle's house from the builders who didn't do a great job of cleaning up, I honestly don't believe that a) anybody would blame the guys that left the nails laying around and b) that the guys who left the nails laying around are to blame.
 
2014-08-08 11:21:46 PM

Catlenfell: So, how much money will they waste prosecuting a guy that's going to be followed by the system for the rest of his life?


But, but...the prosecutor will get to parade around in front of the cameras and lay the groundwork for their Senate run later. Got to keep the big picture in mind.
 
2014-08-08 11:22:08 PM

Lsherm: Again I have to ask, why are Fark liberals so adamant about defending Hinkley.  Did he reach hero status somehow?


Maybe it has nothing to do with liberalism or Hinckley, and people just think that attributing a person's cause of death to an incident that happened a third of a century prior is kind of ridiculous.
 
2014-08-08 11:22:53 PM
If the authorities have decided to charge Hinckley with Brady's death, then it proves that the rich and powerful live under privileged laws and justice that the rest of us are excluded from benefitting. Can anyone cite a precedence where someone, who is not rich or powerful (or friends of the privileged elite) has been charged with homicide 33 years after the incident?

Oligarchy. Get used to it.
 
2014-08-08 11:23:24 PM
You realize the PR is now

James Brady was killed by an assassins bullet meant for Reagan. He would have lived until 96 if it was not for the guns!

/gun control advocate
//still can see spin
 
2014-08-08 11:23:28 PM

Jiro Dreams Of McRibs: "What I was, I am not now," Brady said at the time. "What I was, I will never be again."


Sounds like something the Buddha would say... about every moment of his lifetime.
 
2014-08-08 11:23:33 PM
How long before conservatives say this is just a ploy to make guns look bad?
 
2014-08-08 11:25:51 PM
As others have said, if he died as a result of complications from the shooting, the manner of death will be homicide on the death certificate. That doesn't mean criminal charges will be forthcoming.

Same with people like my late uncle...he got in a car wreck that left him a quadriplegic and died 10 years after the accident due to complications that arise from being a quadriplegic. Manner of death on the certificate was 'accidental'.
 
2014-08-08 11:26:31 PM

trappedspirit: It's a circus paid for by your tax money so you should at least smile and act like you are enjoying it



/Sure, just like the OJ trial, religion, and ass rape.
 
2014-08-08 11:26:51 PM

wildcardjack: Doesn't this get into double jeopardy territory?

Anyhow. Timothy McVeigh was executed by federal authorities in a state without capital punishment. The county coroner ruled it a homicide.

And I guess any time a coroner looks into a case where someone dies due to the action of another it becomes homicide, just definitionally. A justified homicide is still homicide. A man dying from injuries sustained in war 30 years might also qualify. It's a coroner report, not an indictment.


McVeigh was executed in Terre Haute, which, aside from smelling horrible and sucking at life, is still part of the state of Indiana. I assure you they still have capital punishment and that the Vigo county coroner did not rule it a homicide, not the least bit because no autopsy was conducted.
 
2014-08-08 11:27:02 PM

Lsherm: Again I have to ask, why are Fark liberals so adamant about defending Hinkley.  Did he reach hero status somehow?


I'm laughing at the concept of being thought of as a Fark liberal.

But, tell you what, I like you, so I'm going to clue you in on something:  Even the conservatives might not be so hot on getting revenge on Hinckley because Brady died.   For reasons.

So we may actually have the seemingly paradoxical result of "liberals" wanting to charge Hinckley, and "conservatives" not being all that excited about it.

Now, I'll be honest:  You know I'm not a fan of James Brady or his wife Sarah.   For reasons.  But I'm not saying this because my beliefs clash with theirs.  I've said before on Fark that I think there should be a limit:
http://www.fark.com/comments/6734003/73065366#c73065366

That was nearly 3 years ago.  I still feel the same way, and it doesn't matter one whit that it was James Brady in this case.  I'd feel the same way no matter who it was.
 
2014-08-08 11:29:03 PM

MaudlinMutantMollusk: HE SHOT ST. RONALD! HANG THE BASTARD!


Ists a sad shame he wasnts such a bad shot..... Maybe i wouldt have to live under all these piss test laws. May nancy and st reagan burn in hell!
 
2014-08-08 11:29:40 PM

Jiro Dreams Of McRibs: gameshowhost: I can't wait to see the proximate cause argument from the prosecution.

"What I was, I am not now," Brady said at the time. "What I was, I will never be again."


Someone should have pulled him into shallow water, before he got too deep.
 
2014-08-08 11:30:10 PM

montex: If the authorities have decided to charge Hinckley with Brady's death, then it proves that the rich and powerful live under privileged laws and justice that the rest of us are excluded from benefitting. Can anyone cite a precedence where someone, who is not rich or powerful (or friends of the privileged elite) has been charged with homicide 33 years after the incident?

Oligarchy. Get used to it.


I'm pretty sure if we checked we'd find at least one similar 'scumbag shot cop during felony, gets put on trial for murder years later when cop chokes on a donut'.  I'm almost certain I remember one being on Fark, even.  33 years, not so much, but the precedent is there.

Not that it actually changes the 'one law for them' portion of your argument, but it's there.
 
Displayed 50 of 134 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report