nychoya3
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,674
|
Post by nychoya3 on May 5, 2010 13:02:07 GMT -5
I'm not really sure how "mutual combat" would be a defense here. He broke down her door and assaulted her - she had every reason to fight back and defend herself. If that made him mad, I don't see that as a defense.
I have a hard time seeing this as anything other than murder based on the facts reported. He should spend a long, long time in prison. It's just a horrifying tragedy.
One thing this isn't is a "lacrosse" story. This is a story about a disturbed and violent young man and the lives he destroyed, not about lacrosse players or Virginia lacrosse.
|
|
theexorcist
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,506
|
Post by theexorcist on May 5, 2010 13:08:54 GMT -5
Austin, There's no viable "accident" claim here. The evidence is that he smashed her head several times into the wall according to the affidavit. There's potentially an argument that the causing of death was accidental, but that shouldn't be confused with any claim that there was an intent to cause this girl harm. Put differently, it wasn't an accident when he punched through the door, slammed her head, and left her to die. What may have been unintended was for it to actually result in death. Was the victim unconscious when this happened? We don't know what happened between the defendant busting through the door and the victim's head hitting the wall. Did she get up? Did she say anything? Did she try to hit the defendant? Did she pick up a sharp object? I'll agree that based on the current press accounts it doesn't look good for the defendant, but I don't think we know the entire story yet, and defense counsel's claim of "accident" suggests additional details exist. ON EDIT: I'm not saying that a "good" or "viable" defense exists, just that it's too early to rule one out based on media reports based on information from law enforcement. This may be just why I didn't go to law school, but how can smacking someone's head up against a wall be classified as an "accident"? Did he find a fly on the wall and grab the first thing he could see to kill it, which was unfortunately her face, and then do it repeatedly to make sure the fly was dead? Oh, and the fact that he kicked her door in suggests premeditation. And the fact that he tried to destroy her computer suggests evidence tampering.
|
|
|
Post by 98hoya on May 5, 2010 13:08:58 GMT -5
Austin, There's no viable "accident" claim here. The evidence is that he smashed her head several times into the wall according to the affidavit. There's potentially an argument that the causing of death was accidental, but that shouldn't be confused with any claim that there was an intent to cause this girl harm. Put differently, it wasn't an accident when he punched through the door, slammed her head, and left her to die. What may have been unintended was for it to actually result in death. Was the victim unconscious when this happened? We don't know what happened between the defendant busting through the door and the victim's head hitting the wall. Did she get up? Did she say anything? Did she try to hit the defendant? Did she pick up a sharp object? I'll agree that based on the current press accounts it doesn't look good for the defendant, but I don't think we know the entire story yet, and defense counsel's claim of "accident" suggests additional details exist. ON EDIT: I'm not saying that a "good" or "viable" defense exists, just that it's too early to rule one out based on media reports based on information from law enforcement. I'm assuming you're just playing devil's advocate and I agree that anything is possible...but I think we both have a pretty good idea exactly what happened. Agreed?
|
|
|
Post by 98hoya on May 5, 2010 13:14:54 GMT -5
Was the victim unconscious when this happened? We don't know what happened between the defendant busting through the door and the victim's head hitting the wall. Did she get up? Did she say anything? Did she try to hit the defendant? Did she pick up a sharp object? I'll agree that based on the current press accounts it doesn't look good for the defendant, but I don't think we know the entire story yet, and defense counsel's claim of "accident" suggests additional details exist. ON EDIT: I'm not saying that a "good" or "viable" defense exists, just that it's too early to rule one out based on media reports based on information from law enforcement. This may be just why I didn't go to law school, but how can smacking someone's head up against a wall be classified as an "accident"? Did he find a fly on the wall and grab the first thing he could see to kill it, which was unfortunately her face, and then do it repeatedly to make sure the fly was dead? Oh, and the fact that he kicked her door in suggests premeditation. And the fact that he tried to destroy her computer suggests evidence tampering. Exorcist, You've got it right - there's no "accident" here. We all know this, but if we're not paying attention, it could slip by (as it doubtless will slip by many people who heard the lawyer's speech): the connotation of the term "accidental" goes to the CAUSE of something, not the EFFECT. If the evidence was that they were having a fun pillow fight and she mistakenly hit her head and died, that's an accidental death. If the evidence (which it is) is that he meant to harm her really badly but arguably not to kill her (which is unclear if that's what he intended, but a fair inference is that, at the least, he meant to hurt her badly), then the cause was not accidental, the effect was. Big difference.
|
|
|
Post by 98hoya on May 5, 2010 13:25:41 GMT -5
I'm not really sure how "mutual combat" would be a defense here. He broke down her door and assaulted her - she had every reason to fight back and defend herself. If that made him mad, I don't see that as a defense. I have a hard time seeing this as anything other than murder based on the facts reported. He should spend a long, long time in prison. It's just a horrifying tragedy. One thing this isn't is a "lacrosse" story. This is a story about a disturbed and violent young man and the lives he destroyed, not about lacrosse players or Virginia lacrosse. NYC, Interesting - I was thinking about the coverage this story is getting a bit. It seems to me that the story has gotten a ton of ink. I think it's because the bad guy and the victim are part of the "in" crowd. If this had happened at some nondescript state school among non-athletes, it'd be just another crazy guy killing his girlfriend. In fact, I'm sure it's happened several times this year on college campuses But this is different because it happened among elite kids who, at least on the face of it, lead a charmed life. It seems to me to be akin to the complaint I've heard from black activists - when a black kids dies, it's just another murder; when a white kid dies, it's huge news. This appears to me to be similar sort of phenomenon: it's a story because these kids are "elites."
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 19,161
|
Post by SSHoya on May 5, 2010 14:47:24 GMT -5
If the autopsy reveals rape or attempted rape, this guy could be looking at a capital murder charge. Under Virginia law, death penalty applies to:
5. The willful, deliberate, and premeditated killing of any person in the commission of, or subsequent to, rape or attempted rape, forcible sodomy or attempted forcible sodomy or object sexual penetration;
|
|
|
Post by 98hoya on May 5, 2010 15:19:47 GMT -5
SSHoya,
Does VA have felony murder? If so, I'd think that would be an angle for the prosecutor (the underlying felony would be going in to steal the laptop (burglary and/or robbery).
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 19,161
|
Post by SSHoya on May 5, 2010 15:26:18 GMT -5
Yes, defined as follows:
� 18.2-32. First and second degree murder defined; punishment.
Murder, other than capital murder, by poison, lying in wait, imprisonment, starving, or by any willful, deliberate, and premeditated killing, or in the commission of, or attempt to commit, arson, rape, forcible sodomy, inanimate or animate object sexual penetration, robbery, burglary or abduction, except as provided in � 18.2-31, is murder of the first degree, punishable as a Class 2 felony.
All murder other than capital murder and murder in the first degree is murder of the second degree and is punishable by confinement in a state correctional facility for not less than five nor more than forty years.
There are different ways to charge this one as murder. I speculate that his defense attorney's spin as the killing as an "accident" is the beginning of a plea bargain to avoid either capital punishment or felony murder. The defendant has already admitted committing an act that led to the death of the victim, thus we are now bargaining on how to lessen the potential punishment. No way this was an "accident."
|
|
|
Post by 98hoya on May 5, 2010 15:33:15 GMT -5
Based on what I know of the facts and this area of law (not so much - at least not as much as folks who specialize in murder defense), I'd expect that if this goes to trial you'll see an intoxication defense to try to knock out the murder 1 (assuming VA allows that defense). D could even bring in character evidence that he's a mean drunk. If it doesn't go to trial, I'd expect a plea bargain where D counsel works out some deal where the sentence is something in the 25 year range with a mandatory 15 to serve.
|
|
|
Post by AustinHoya03 on May 5, 2010 15:37:26 GMT -5
I'm assuming you're just playing devil's advocate and I agree that anything is possible...but I think we both have a pretty good idea exactly what happened. Agreed? Pretty much. ON EDIT: Apparently I'm not doing a very good job of it either. Even the defense attorneys are ready to hang this guy.
|
|
CAHoya07
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,598
|
Post by CAHoya07 on May 5, 2010 16:09:26 GMT -5
Interesting - I was thinking about the coverage this story is getting a bit. It seems to me that the story has gotten a ton of ink. I think it's because the bad guy and the victim are part of the "in" crowd. If this had happened at some nondescript state school among non-athletes, it'd be just another crazy guy killing his girlfriend. In fact, I'm sure it's happened several times this year on college campuses But this is different because it happened among elite kids who, at least on the face of it, lead a charmed life. It seems to me to be akin to the complaint I've heard from black activists - when a black kids dies, it's just another murder; when a white kid dies, it's huge news. This appears to me to be similar sort of phenomenon: it's a story because these kids are "elites." I agree with that and I don't. If this happened to a black couple playing lacrosse or a similar sport in college, I think it would be just as big of a story. I do agree that this would not be a huge story if they were non-athletes, and that the status of being two members on top 5 college lacrosse teams made it a national story. I don't think class or race are huge factors here. It's a bit sad that the two biggest college lacrosse stories in the past five years are two things that have happened off the field: the Duke case and now this.
|
|
|
Post by 98hoya on May 5, 2010 16:26:29 GMT -5
Interesting - I was thinking about the coverage this story is getting a bit. It seems to me that the story has gotten a ton of ink. I think it's because the bad guy and the victim are part of the "in" crowd. If this had happened at some nondescript state school among non-athletes, it'd be just another crazy guy killing his girlfriend. In fact, I'm sure it's happened several times this year on college campuses But this is different because it happened among elite kids who, at least on the face of it, lead a charmed life. It seems to me to be akin to the complaint I've heard from black activists - when a black kids dies, it's just another murder; when a white kid dies, it's huge news. This appears to me to be similar sort of phenomenon: it's a story because these kids are "elites." I agree with that and I don't. If this happened to a black couple playing lacrosse or a similar sport in college, I think it would be just as big of a story. I do agree that this would not be a huge story if they were non-athletes, and that the "status" of being two members on top 5 college lacrosse teams made it a national story. However, I don't think their status as "elites" is doing this, but the status of being two student-athletes on high-ranking college teams in a fairly recognizable sport. In other words, I don't think race is a big factor. It's a bit sad that the two biggest college lacrosse stories in the past five years are two things that have happened off the field: the Duke case and now this. I think we're pretty much in agreement. I do think there's a class thing going on though because I think to the average American, lacrosse is not a well-known sport...however attractive kids from top schools who look moneyed and seem to have golden futures is something they understand - so when one of them gets killed by another one of them, it's a big deal. I was wrong to imply I think it's racial, although I guess there's often a connection between race and class (obviously, the Duke lax case is an example of that - it wasn't a story just because of an accusation of rape, or college kids accused of rape, or college athletes accused of rape, it was all of those plus rich vs. poor). Not sure if that's articulate or even defensible, but that's how I perceived the coverage.
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 19,161
|
Post by SSHoya on May 6, 2010 7:46:42 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by JohnJacquesLayup on May 6, 2010 8:02:53 GMT -5
Here's the excerpt mentioned above:
Asked to weigh the significance of the more recent U-Va. arrests, Paul Haagen, senior associate dean for academic affairs at Duke University law school, said that "if that many people are getting themselves in trouble, then there is a problem. The question is exactly what the problem is. Is it male students or athletes or the lacrosse team, or is it U-Va. students in general?
"Unless I know what the comparison numbers are, I'm not in a very good position to tell what's going on. On their face, those seem to me like very high numbers," said Haagen, himself a former collegiate lacrosse player.
In contrast to U-Va., only one current player on Georgetown University's men's lacrosse team has been charged with an offense of any kind, according to public court records. The University of Maryland has two players who have faced criminal charges since they started at College Park.
|
|
CAHoya07
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,598
|
Post by CAHoya07 on May 6, 2010 12:27:58 GMT -5
I think they're trying to make a connection between the hard partying ways of the UVA lacrosse team, and Huguely's alleged murder of Love. I just don't see it. I feel like a lot of college sports teams party pretty hard, and sometimes people get into trouble. It doesn't mean they're going to go out and murder people. If there were really a correlation, I feel like we'd see this kind of story a lot more often, which we don't.
|
|
hifigator
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,387
|
Post by hifigator on May 6, 2010 12:42:55 GMT -5
Interesting - I was thinking about the coverage this story is getting a bit. It seems to me that the story has gotten a ton of ink. I think it's because the bad guy and the victim are part of the "in" crowd. If this had happened at some nondescript state school among non-athletes, it'd be just another crazy guy killing his girlfriend. In fact, I'm sure it's happened several times this year on college campuses But this is different because it happened among elite kids who, at least on the face of it, lead a charmed life. It seems to me to be akin to the complaint I've heard from black activists - when a black kids dies, it's just another murder; when a white kid dies, it's huge news. This appears to me to be similar sort of phenomenon: it's a story because these kids are "elites." I agree with that and I don't. If this happened to a black couple playing lacrosse or a similar sport in college, I think it would be just as big of a story. I do agree that this would not be a huge story if they were non-athletes, and that the status of being two members on top 5 college lacrosse teams made it a national story. I don't think class or race are huge factors here. It's a bit sad that the two biggest college lacrosse stories in the past five years are two things that have happened off the field: the Duke case and now this. I totally agree with you on the last point. Lacrosse is so far down the list of importance to the vast majority, that stories covering the championship game are buried as a mere paragraph on page 10d, if covered at all. The only way to get front page mention is for something like this to happen. I've got to admit, that I am not a big lacrosse fan, but I would still like the kids to be recognized for something good rather than only when something tragic happens.
|
|
rosslynhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,595
|
Post by rosslynhoya on May 6, 2010 14:36:58 GMT -5
I think they're trying to make a connection between the hard partying ways of the UVA lacrosse team, and Huguely's alleged murder of Love. If you and your roommates are so faced that your roommates can't tell the difference between you being regular-passed out and murdered-passed out, you all might have a drinking problem. When this was breaking news on Monday night, the early stories reported that the murder took place after a lacrosse team golf outing, I immediately wondered if it was a golf outing or a "golf outing" and the fact that the curious statement about golf hasn't come up again, I think it's safe to assume the idiot media just didn't comprehend the teams drinking themselves into oblivion. I think this could be a good opportunity to begin a gentle inquiry into the excesses of lacrosse culture, at the very least to debunk this growing perception that there's some unusual correlation of money, privilege, drunken violence, and lacrosse.
|
|
theexorcist
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,506
|
Post by theexorcist on May 6, 2010 15:46:07 GMT -5
I think they're trying to make a connection between the hard partying ways of the UVA lacrosse team, and Huguely's alleged murder of Love. If you and your roommates are so Editedfaced that your roommates can't tell the difference between you being regular-passed out and murdered-passed out, you all might have a drinking problem. When this was breaking news on Monday night, the early stories reported that the murder took place after a lacrosse team golf outing, I immediately wondered if it was a golf outing or a "golf outing" and the fact that the curious statement about golf hasn't come up again, I think it's safe to assume the idiot media just didn't comprehend the teams drinking themselves into oblivion. I think this could be a good opportunity to begin a gentle inquiry into the excesses of lacrosse culture, at the very least to debunk this growing perception that there's some unusual correlation of money, privilege, drunken violence, and lacrosse. On the last point, it seems sports-driven. Almost every single big-time college football team has had at least one member arrested for something bigger than DUI, yet I don't think that anyone would say that college football is responsible for that violence. So either we expand what we analyze or we accept that this isn't a lacross issue.
|
|
|
Post by HometownHoya on May 6, 2010 18:39:27 GMT -5
I think they're trying to make a connection between the hard partying ways of the UVA lacrosse team, and Huguely's alleged murder of Love. I just don't see it. I feel like a lot of college sports teams party pretty hard, and sometimes people get into trouble. It doesn't mean they're going to go out and murder people. If there were really a correlation, I feel like we'd see this kind of story a lot more often, which we don't. I have heard that when George did it, not only was he drunk but he was also on coke and xanax, a very dangerous combination. Obviously it was an accident that she died but I'm sure he thought his actions up to the point where he "accidentally" killed her were fine. Partially also why he probably admitted right away and did an awful job at "covering up".
|
|