True, but it’s a distinction that may not matter to a jury. The defense will claim that it’s not sold as a lethal weapon even in the intended use case, and it’s reasonable to assume the perps didn’t think that using it would kill anybody.
They might still be convicted on whatever laws exist for actions leading to a death, if not a direct causal link from the bear spray.
I don’t know about that. I wouldn’t be too sure either Tanios or Khater are pasty-white.
People are saying that Junior, Eric, and Ivanka were running the Bear Spray and Flag Pole concession at the rally.
Bring on the emails and phone videos.
That seems pretty clear-cut to me too. He died during the commission of a felony. It wouldn’t matter if he were a co-conspirator or a victim. And he’s a cop! It should be felony murder.
How many times were the 9/11 suspects waterboarded? I’d suggest an equivalent number of times on the other end of the bear spray.
They’d definitely charge him with felony murder in Dallas Co. You kill a cop and you get charged with a capital crime.
Felony murder rule should be at the top of the list of charges. Then, let the jury decide.
I wonder how that logic holds up with someone shooting a cop with a taser, causing a heart attack.
Government symbols, uniforms, etc are not copyrighted as far as I know. Yes, there’s a flag code, but it amounts to suggestions. For instance, anyone can do whatever they want with the American flag and they do.
There has to be a connection to the cause of death. He might have died from something unrelated to Bear Spray.
Nah, they weren’t prepared for bears.
I have never seen a can of Bear Spray, but I presume there is a warning label on it. “Not for Human Consumption, Do Not Swallow, Keep Out of Eyes”, etc.
Deliberate misuse of product might raise the charges?
(Not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV)
IANAL, and I don’t know what the judge’s instructions to a jury would be in that situation, but it seems to me that intent to kill, or not, would matter to a jury.
I’m not going to look up federal and DC case law to confirm, but “malice aforethought” generically requires (1) intent to kill, which almost certainly isn’t present here, (2) intent to inflict grievous bodily harm, which c’mon, it’s bear spray, (3) extreme indifference to human life, which again, it’s bear spray, or (4) intent to commit a felony, which maybe applies, but bear spray seems more misdemeanor-ish, at least outside the context of a violent insurrection against the federal government. I suspect it will be hard for prosecutors to convince 12 jurors beyond a reasonable doubt that these insurrectionist doofuses had malice aforethought, but hey, you never know.
I guess it depends on the charge. As far as I know, negligent homicide can be charged regardless of intent.
The problem is that he died a day later, having continued to work and do other things.
Unless it’s established that there is a direct connection between the bear spray and his death, too many other possibilities to get this to a beyond-a-reasonable-doubt levels, and the defense would hit on every one of them.
They can prove the assault charge-- that’s on video. Making it a manslaughter or murder charge is going to take more evidence that directly links the use to his death.
Well, then you have your threats from T Rex, Siberian Unicorns, and Saber tooth cats.
It’s a dangerous world out there.
I’m gonna Perry Mason you here and say that if his death was caused by something to do with the insurrection (blunt force trauma, stroke caused by attendant hyper stress response, etc.), then there’s some kind of culpability.
IANAL, but neither was Perry Mason (in real life).
They certainly won’t get the death penalty unless they’re charged with murder.