Looks like the guy fleeing the cops when the Helicopters crashed, will be charged with their deaths.

[trumad]

Got mixed feelings about this one.

<snip>
The man fleeing from police was later taken into custody by a SWAT team after barricading himself inside a house, police said. Police Chief Jack Harris suggested he could be charged in connection with the collision.

"I believe you will want to talk to investigators, but I think he will be held responsible for any of the deaths from this tragedy," Harris told reporters at the scene. He did not elaborate.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20070727/helicopters-collide/

[Faygo Kid]

1. Got a good discussion going on just this point on DU. Here's the link.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1457067

In 50 years, this will be in a law school textbook somewhere.

If we survive the Bush Administration and still have law schools, that is.

[mentalsolstice]

29. Retired lawyer here!

Yes, it will be in the hornbooks. Just like slip'n fall cases (bring rubber-soled slippers whenever you have surgery).

This case will be interesting. At what point, in the commission of a crime, could one (a criminal) expect two helicopters colliding?

Felony murder is usually about expectation.

It will be interesting for 1st year law students...

[Faygo Kid]

37. No longer practicing here, either.

If they ever start blogging about the Carbolic smoke ball case or Rose of Aberlone, I promise to keep my mouth shut. This will be a classic, though.

[sarcasmo]

48. Let's say we use this logic in another form.

A high speed car chase and the officers car collides with another car not involved in the chase. Would this be a charge against the officer or the perp he was chasing. This whole nightmare opens a Pandora's Box IMHO of course.

[mentalsolstice]

57. In terms of the commission of a felony...

you can expect chasing cops, on roads frequented by civilians...however, colliding news choppers? Is there a difference in expectations such as a large news market, like LA, and small news market like Troy, AL?

I'm just playing defense atty. here.

In real life, I grieve for the families of the dead...

[sarcasmo]

58. Helicopters in the air equals media sensationalism.

Chasing after the story then crashing. Would this be the fault of the perp?

[kanrok]

73. Probably not

But it potentially could, depending upon the facts, It certainly can open the police officers to a civil lawsuit, especially if their actions violated police policies and procedures. But, this, again, is fact specific. For instance, if the chase were over long distances at high speeds, in densely poplulated areas during the day time, when the police are chasing a person for a minor charge (say, "speeding" or minor theft), than certainly they would be held liable for injuries or death to innocent third parties.

On the felony murder charge, it appears to be a bit of a stretch.

[AZBlue]

I couldn't be happier.

And it's not just because this occurred in my backyard. If you commit a crime and some dies as a result, now matter how it's related to that crime, you should be charged.

[Kagemusha]

11. How it's related to that crime defines if it's "as a result".

But I'm not going to bother arguing. The facts are still being investigated, and those facts shall surely come up before a judge and a jury, and I can only hope that justice is done, no more and no less.

[AZBlue]

23. True. Of course, as this relates to his actions, it is "a result" in this case.

[calteacherguy]

69. It's not a result of his actions, it's a result of the actions of the people in the helicopter.

They CHOSE to be there, and they CHOSE to fly dangerously close.

It's tragic, but they are the ones to blame in our legal system, and rightly so. By your logic, the U.S. military would be responsible for the death of a war correspondent who got a little "too close to the action."

[Bluerthanblue]

88. suppose i was tuning my radio station to hear about the chase

and i crashed into a school bus full of kids- would these deaths be the fault of the guy driving? Using the logic that says he is responsible for the news-copters demise, it could be argued that i wouldn't have been distracted if he wasn't being 'pursued'- or beyond that if the media wasn't blitzing it- or beyond that if the cops had the good judgment to call of the chase?

Where does this foolishness stop????

I'm with you Calteacherguy- people have to accept the reality that we can't always look for someone else to blame when life shits.

Sometimes it isn't ANYONE'S fault- it is just a stupid, cruel accident.

Isn't that what an accident is after all?


i'm sick of the way society always trys to capitolize on tragedy.

:shrug:

[WinkyDink]

85. Hello??!! The crime in question had nothing to do with the helicopters! THE LAW

means if someone dies AT THE SCENE of your crime, AS A RESULT of your crime (e.g., 2 men rob a bank; only one shoots dead a teller. Gun-less guy charged with murder, as well.).

So a criminal SUSPECT is responsible now for rubber-necking nit-wits??

[OlderButWiser]

2. No way

The only way I could see that even being remotely possible is if one of the copters was a police chopper.

[Blackhatjack]

3. I don't think so... unless the helicopter crews were performing a police function...

[VP505]

19. Even if they were police

the Pilot has the absolute responsibility to see and be seen, i.e, collision avoidance, its solely the pilots responsibility and I can't possibly see how some DA can transfer that responsibility to someone on the ground not directly involved with the operation of that aircraft.

[beam me up scottie]

4. Unfuckingbelievable.

What if I walk down the street in my bikini and two guys get in a car wreck?

[AZBlue]

5. It's not a crime to walk down the street in your bikini.

[beam me up scottie]

6. Then what if I was naked?

[AZBlue]

18. Hey, knock yourself out.

But if you kill someone as a result of your crime (which I'm not sure walking naked down the street is), you should be held accountable.

[beam me up scottie]

21. And if I was watching the car chase & I tripped over my coffee table and died from a head injury?

Sorry, they deserve a Darwin Award, not reparations.

[AZBlue]

24. I'm so sick of DU'ers dancing on the graves of people.

Nothing more for me to say. I'm disgusted and I'm done.

[beam me up scottie]

26. Oh brother. Spare me the melodrama.

Where'd I put that jerk off smilie...

[Richard Steele]

34. Psst...

Here ya go:

[beam me up scottie]

36. !

:rofl:

Thanks!

[U4ikLefty]

51. OMG I copied that smiley...lol, awesome!!! Thanks. n/t

[Bluebear]

50. And because you can't have too many....

[beam me up scottie]

52. Ah, there he is...

You know me, if someone wants to be offended, I give them their money's worth. :evilgrin:

[havocmom]

66. LOL coulda used your back-up the other night

same problem: overloaded offenseometer belonging to one with disdain for reality.

[beam me up scottie]

67. I swear they look for reasons to be offended.

They accuse us of everything from murder to being a paid shill for Bushco and grab their toys and stomp off home when they get the reaction they were looking for.

Jeesh.

[havocmom]

74. Personally, I think they are first cousins with the "I'm concerned" crowd.

Would not surprise me one bit if we find there are posters who work for entities/people that would like liberals to sit down, shut up, and be the door-mat wussies they tell the masses we are. ;) If we aren't behaving in the stereotypical manner in which the RW likes to portray us, they loose a lot of power over those who don't take time to find things out for them selves.

edited for typo

[beam me up scottie]

27. Answer my question-If I was watching it on tv & I tripped over my coffee table and died as a result?

Is he culpable?

[Faygo Kid]

40. Too remote. Let's look at another hypothetical.

This stuff isn't easy; that's why we have a legal system that must at all costs be protected from hacks like Alberto Gonzalez. Let's go the other way: Say that a mother and child were run down while lawfully crossing the street because this fleeing guy forced another car off the road, and that car struck them. No culpability there, either? He walks from that?

[beam me up scottie]

42. That didn't happen.

Two professional rubber-neckers didn't look where they were going and flew into each other.

If the pilots had lived, they should have been charged, not the dweeb on the ground.

on edit, I realize you are citing case law, but to me, it is grossly unfair to hold the driver responsible when the pilots were the ones who were grossly negligent.

[Faygo Kid]

46. And you didn't trip over your coffee table, did you?

But if you did, it would likely be considered too remote to link to the original felony, while the mother and child dying - well, you can determine for yourself whether that one is too remote. Thanks for the exchange.

[beam me up scottie]

49. Like I said, it's just my .02

At least I refrained from saying "So sue me". :)

[Faygo Kid]

53. And I did enjoy our exchange, and thank you for it.

I will only note that you kept me up late, and believe me, I need my Beauty Rest.

[beam me up scottie]

54. I hear ya.

G'night!

[RaleighNCDUer]

59. And isn't the helicopter collision equally remote?

We've been watching news helicopters pursue ground traffic for literally decades, and this is the first time I've heard of a collision in mid-air while doing it. Wouldn't that indicate that this is not a predictable outcome of the driver's crime?

It is aburd to the nth degree.

[RaleighNCDUer]

60. Absolutely not. There is a direct chain of actions connecting the

culprit to the death, actions initiated by the culprit.

There is nothing the driver on the ground could do that could have any physical effect on a helicopter 300' above him. What happens up there is entirely in the hands of the pilot.

Now, if the guy on the ground took a shot at the copter causing the pilot to react unexpectedly, thus causing a collision, there might be a case (even though two pilots should know better than to fly so close to each other that such a maneuver could cause a collision - he'd still be culpable).

Think of it as a pooltable - the culprit is the 8 ball, and could be culpable for any interactions on that table as the balls bounce off one another. The helicopters are on an entirely different table.

[treestar]

82. Read the Palsgraf case

It is for first year law students, to teach the concept of proximate cause.

You are talking actual cause, or but-for cause, but for x, y would not have happened.

But to hold people accountable, you need proximate cause.

Otherwise, you could be responsible for deaths you don't even know about. Something you did could have led to something that led to something that led to something that led to the death.

[Tektonik]

64. .

:rofl:

Logic escapes you, and I'm glad you've escaped this thread.

[treestar]

80. Oh, please. You changed the subject.

Because you are trying to argue that but for causation is the only ground for punishment, which will lead to injustice, since people can do identical acts and have different results.

The criminal will be punished, don't worry so much about that. It's not necessary to add superfluous charges.

[treestar]

79. Shouldn't the people driving the cars be watching the road?

[treestar]

78. But the issue is causation

There has to be a limit even on crimes.

Someone else does the same thing and there is no helicopter crash because there are no helicopters around. So why have a more severe punishment for the person who happened to do the same criminal act with helicopters around? We're talking about justice here.

What if the helicopters were badly maintained, or the pilots negligent?

[Faygo Kid]

8. You have not committed a felony crime by walking in a bikini. Or have you?

Please forgive me, but if if your walking in a bikini can be construed as a felony, all I can say is - wow.

[beam me up scottie]

13. What if I was watching the car chase & I tripped over my coffee table and died from a head injury?

Where do you draw the line?

[Faygo Kid]

28. It has to be related to the commission of a felony crime. Check this link.

This might help. Believe me, it's a long-standing legal principle. Whether you agree or disagree, it goes back to the 12th century, and it will be litigated.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felony_murder

[beam me up scottie]

31. Back to the 12th century, eh?

That explains a lot.

[Faygo Kid]

33. English common law. Basis for our legal system. That old Constitution is quaint at 200+, too.

I suppose we could make it up as we go along, like the Bush Administration, but I for one prefer not to. Please remember: It's not automatic that this charge will stick. It has to be litigated, and may yet be dropped. It's a legal principle that may or may not apply in this case. I think it's a good one, but there is a rule of reason in its application. My feeling is that there may be a change in venue at the very least, as feelings will run very high against this individual.

[beam me up scottie]

39. I live in an area of the country where people are convicted & put to death because of "feelings".

Trust me, it's not a good thing.

[Faygo Kid]

43. My "feeling" only regards a possible change in venue. C'mon.

The legal principle of felony murder exists. Whether it will be applied in this case is something we can speculate about endlessly, but the system provides for its consideration. I for one will wait for more information to form an opinion, but it is undeniable that unintended consequences arising from the commission of a felony are considered a consequence of that felony. That is not an opinion, that is the law. Whether the collision of the helicopters is considered too remote a possibility to rise to the level felony murder is a question for the trier of fact, and I have no dog in this hunt. Except to consider it a sad tragedy all the way around, but especially for the families of those who died.

[beam me up scottie]

45. I wasn't talking about your feelings, I was referring to those of the future jurors.

It seems grossly unfair to hold the driver responsible for the pilots' negligence.

Just my .02

[RaleighNCDUer]

61. Hanging the poor for stealing bread has an equally long standing

history under English common law.

Are we fucking barbarians?

[treestar]

83. Merely because something is a felony doesn't mean it is the

cause of something else.

These helicopters could have had the same accident if they were covering a lawful protest.

[burythehatchet]

9. you're a girl???

:blush:

[beam me up scottie]

15. As tempted as I am to say no...

guilty as charged. :D

[njtechguy]

76. WOW

I understand that if the cops in persuit got killed that the person fleeing should be charged, but in no way should this carry on to the media who was eager to show another police chase that 4 of their employees got killed.

I think the people in charge of the corporate media should be put on trial for dumbing down the american people along with the 4 deaths of these people. Why is a police chase such news that we need helicopters overhead? Maybe they should send the helicopters to Washington to see what is Bush is really up too, or maybe to cover the many protests going on around the country......or anything else that is real news!

[burythehatchet]

7. unbelievable

if the choppers being there served some fucking purpose then I could see it.

[Captain Hilts]

20. News choppers and those going to Bethesda Naval and Camp David drive me NUTS...nt

[MadHound]

10. Can't agree with that one

The crook wasn't at the controls, didn't take a shot at the copters, nor ask them to pursue them. The news crew were there of their own free volition, with no overarching duty to be there other than greed for the story, ratings and money.

A couple of weeks ago in Missouri they convicted an escaped prisoner for manslaughter of a cop, even though the cop died in a crash forty miles away while coming to the scene. I didn't agree with that ruling either, and knew that it could lead to a slippery slope. Whoops, and down we go!

[MrSlayer]

12. I think that's a bit unfair.

It's not his fault that these guys crashed into each other and it isn't mandatory that they fly after the chase.

[Blue_In_AK]

14. He shouldn't have been running from the cops

but charging him with the deaths is overkill, IMO.

[Zywiec]

16. Not a chance

His pursuit had nothing to do with the crash. How many other chases are never covered by choppers?

[Monk06]

17. So if I watch it on TV and the news jocks die I'm an accessory to murder?

[Catherine Vincent]

22. I don't agree with that.

I feel bad for the four that died today but the crook shouldn't be charged with their deaths. That's ridiculous.

[cynatnite]

25. I don't know if he should be...

The actions of the pilots need to be investigated.

[VP505]

32. Nothing really to investigate

pilot error on both their parts, collision avoidance is the responsibility of the pilot under the visual flight rules they were operating under. It would be an unbelievable stretch to lay blame on the guy being chased who might have not even know there were two helicopters following.

[cynatnite]

35. Well, the way the law is...

if someone dies during the commission of a crime, no matter the cause of death, the person or persons committing the crime are usually held responsible for it.

It's like if someone robs a bank and a customer dies of a heart attack during the robbery...that person who robbed the bank would be charged for it.

[Bluebear]

56. What if I joined into the high spped chase, to get a thrilling photo to send to CNN?

If I roll over and die, will the carjacker be charged with my death too?

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

30. As Tragic As The Story Is, It's Just Wrong To Do That. Just Plain Wrong.

[Richard Steele]

38. Sorry, no. Those choppers had no responsibility or duty to be there- it was THEIR choice.

Police choppers might be a different story, but these
weren't police choppers.

What if I see a high-speed police chase, and decide to follow
it to get a cell-phone picture of the "action"...

If I crash and die doing that, is the person being chased
held responsible? No, -I- am. And rightly so.

[beam me up scottie]

41. Another good example.

Where do we draw the line?

[AzDar]

44. If a cop were to pull me over for speeding ( a crime), and is killed by

a passing car as he's asking for my license and registration, am I a murderer?
Absolute nonsense.

[Kingshakabobo]

70. It has to be a felony. If you are fleeing a felony and he is killed; you are responsible. n/t

[alarimer]

47. Weren't these news helicopters?

They didn't have to chase him.

[kestrel91316]

55. That's SOP here in CA as far as I know. The copters wouldn't have been

there to collide if not for the crime committed by the guy. So it's all his fault.

[LisaL]

87. What if the copters were following some celebrity doing

whatever it is the celebrities like to do? You could argue that the copters wouldn't be there either if not for that celebrity. The guy was fleeing, but he didn't make the press to cover the story, it was their own choice.

[alcibiades_mystery]

62. News helisopters seeking profit for sensationalized nonsense

Are now under some state obligation to recklessly pursue criminals?

Wow. What a revelation.

[beam me up scottie]

65. I've reconsidered. The tv stations should be held responsible for their deaths.

They sent them up in the hopes of capturing a horrendous crash on video.

Too bad for them the cameras went down with the crew.

[Tektonik]

63. This is a very sad story

however, the criminal is in no way culpable in the deaths.

America has gone fucking bat shit insane.

Seriously if a cop is chasing me, and he makes a wrong choice and gets injured; how the hell would I be responsible when he's the person making the choice?

[Kingshakabobo]

72. In your scenario, you WOULD be guilty IF you were committing a felony.

You run from the cop > common sense says the cop will chase > YOU are responsible for the chase and it's negative outcome.

This helicopter case is a HUGE stretch and probably won't hold any water.

The theory is often applied to armed robbers where one of the ROBBERS is killed by, say, a shop-keeper/victim.

There was an article posted on DU a couple weeks ago about a trooper killed ON HIS WAY to a chase. Not DURING a chase but on his way to the chase. The subject of the chase, who was fleeing from an armed robbery, was convicted............and I thought THAT was a stretch.

[LisaL]

86. If cop a cop was chasing you and he got injured, I think it's a pretty

safe bet you could be charged. He would be doing his job following you. This however was the press.

[calteacherguy]

68. It won't fly in court for one second. He is not responsible for their actions. nt

[rucky]

71. Nice Twist!

don't see it playing out, though.

[Ron Green]

75. These helicopter guys are there to entertain, and the fugitive was their partner.

How can he be held responsible for their deaths, when they were there to exploit him? (Or to exploit his exploits.)

[treestar]

77. Absolutely outrageous

A civil case, maybe. Even then it would be hard to prove.

In law school we read a case called Palsgraf, I think it was, that shows there has to be a limit somewhere. Everything you do sets something else in motion.

Just blame Adam and Eve for it all.

[LisaL]

81. I understand when someone fleeing is charged with the death

of the policeman chasing him/her, if that policeman crashed. If it was a police helicopter crashing I could very well see it. But press?
I am not sure it would be the right thing to hold this guy responsible for it.
After all he didn't make the press to follow him.

[WinkyDink]

84. OMG, prosecuted for others' asinine reporting procedures!