Man shot dead after trying to rob Marrero couple at gunpoint

From the New Orleans Times-Picayune

A man who attempted to rob a Marrero couple at gunpoint Saturday night died after one of the robbery victims, who was armed, shot him, according to the Jefferson Parish Sheriff's Office.

The man was reported shot in the chest at 34 Azalea Court around 8 p.m. He was taken to University Hospital where he was pronounced dead shortly after arrival, said Col. John Fortunato, JPSO spokesman.

Investigators learned that the man was one of three male suspects who tried to rob the couple as they were walking from their driveway to their home. But the male robbery victim was also armed and shot the perpetrator, while the other two suspects fled on foot, Fortunato said.

The identity of the man who died is being withheld pending notification of family.

http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2009/12/man_shot_dead_after_trying_to.html

Pretty simple equation there.

why would they get convicted for murder? The victim of the robbery shot one of the robbers, no one else died. That being the case I see armed robbery (which can still carry decades long prison terms) as the only applicable crime.

Happens all the time.
There was a case in cleveland a few years ago where a pair of teens were holding people up at gunpoint with a BB gun.
They held up the wrong person and one was shot dead... the other kid got nailed on homicide.

...exposes all perpetrators involved to murder charges. It was on this basis that the car accident death of a friend of mine led to a murder charge against one of the three drug runners in the truck that hit her. He was the only one they caught. He wasn't the driver but it didn't matter.

depends on the state.

generally speaking (and it does vary a lot by state) if you commit a felony and in the comission of that felony someone is killed you are charged with felony murder.

Some state specifically exclude death of co-conspirator and some do not.

Because it would be jury nullification time.

I only convict people of ACTS they actually commit, regardless of the law. An unjust law is no law at all.

That is unless you lie just to get picked.

If that's armed robbery, then it's armed robbery. Charge the person with the actual felony they committed. It's not that complicated. Presumably, you'd still have ONE person in the group to charge with murder, since that is the ACT he or she actually committed. Needless to say, if the PLAN was to commit a murder, then they could all be charged with some version of accessory or conspiracy. If the plan was to shoplift, and one of the shoplifters killed a guard, the people who had no intention of killing a guard and in fact DID NOT kill a guard shouldn't be charged with murder. It's a stupid and unjust statute.

"If the plan was to shoplift, and one of the shoplifters killed a guard, the people who had no intention of killing a guard and in fact DID NOT kill a guard shouldn't be charged with murder."

And yet they were involved with the commission of a crime that ended in a murder. This involvement is what the law is about. If you know that when somebody is injured and/or killed you will be charged the same as your insane bud who did the injury/killing wouldn't you tend to think twice about getting involved?

Oneshooter
Livin in Texas

And I would never convict anybody on it.

I don't think charges of murder should be used as leverage. I think they should be used to actually charge people who are believed to have committed a murder.

We're not likely to agree here. I've heard any argument you can come up with on this a thousand times. It's just wrong, in my view, and I would follow through by nullifying the jury if I was forced to sit on a felony murder case.

You're right, there's no arguing to be done, the justice system has no need for liars.

I already said that I would openly state my moral objection to the statute in voir dire. If that wasn't sufficient, then I will have been FORCED to sit on such a case over my openly stated objections. There is NO LIE involved, and you are way over the line.

If you commit a violent crime such as robbery, and anybody gets killed, ALL of the robbers can be charged with murder. It makes robbery more risky.

The theory is if you engage in a serious criminal undertaking, especially crimes involving firearms, you should be held liable for ANY deaths resulting from that crime. The fact that your team had, shall we say, bad luck (as opposed to the intended victim) it doesn't absolve you from the murder charge.

In one of my CHL classes our instructor was giving lots of examples of legal shoot and no shoot situations. One real life example (told by him) was of a woman and man engaged in sexual relations in a pickup truck. Woman's husband comes along and and finds them. She, seeing her husband approaching suddenly starts to push the man away and yells "rape". Husband shoots and kills the man. Wife got convicted of murder.

Don't rob people.

Considering all the anti-gun horseshit you see on GD this at least should have remained where it could be seen by a substantial number of people who do not believe this sort of thing ever happens.

Moderator policy, apparently, though there are antis who try to make out that it's the pro-RKBA types who deliberately try to get threads involving shootings moved into the gungeon because we're scared of people learning the Truth About Guns™.

as what caliber for hunting what game, AK or AR etc. Then it gets moved to "Outdoors" and lost forever.

I have found that if you alert on any gun post pro or anti in GD, the mods will move them to the Gun Forum. Just so you know I was sent a message from the powers that be saying that if I insisted on continuing to post defensive gun posts in general discussion then I would be thrown off of DU. How it is possible to have rules insisting that defensive gun posts be limited to the gun forum and then allow gun violence posts to be posted in general discussion and not be able to see the obvious hypocrisy, I have no idea.

You see postings (which by any reasonable stretch of imagination are designed to support strict gun-control) in GD, Latest News, States, and elsewhere, with a quick snatch of "K & Rs," "just common sense," etc., before pro-2A folks catch up, and/or before the OP is moved to the "gungeon." Then a great wailing and gnashing of teeth arises about how the posting was moved! I'm all FOR leaving gun topics in Trade Policy, Gardening, Cat Bathing, or just about anywhere the gun-controllers want.

But these guys don't want anyone to interfere with their penis-envy jokes.

Awesome!! Chalk one up for the good guys...