You can login if you already have an account or register by clicking the button below.
Registering is free and all you need is a username and password. We never ask you for your e-mail.
Grumpy is actually correct. In most jurisdictions, you can make a legal inference from his actions that the dude had intent to kill. My guess is there were other reasons that the prosecutor charged it the way he did. He is probably leaving room to tab charge it later and force a plea.
[+]goatboy3 points2 points5 points
ago
(edited ago)
[–]goatboy3 points
2 points
5 points
(+5|-3)
ago
(edited ago)
One of the lesser known parts of the Patriot Act is no one can be charged with murder or attempted murder on a McDonald's property without also charging McDonald's with the same crime for serving McDonald's food. As you can imagine, most prosecutors don't want to get into that fight.
view the rest of the comments →
[–] Grumpy_Old_Man 2 points 20 points 22 points (+22|-2) ago
" He has been charged with aggravated battery with a deadly weapon"
Why not attempted murder? I'm pretty sure when you shoot someone you're trying to kill them. Right?
[–] [deleted] 1 point 11 points 12 points (+12|-1) ago
[–] MyWifeDontKnowItsMe ago
Grumpy is actually correct. In most jurisdictions, you can make a legal inference from his actions that the dude had intent to kill. My guess is there were other reasons that the prosecutor charged it the way he did. He is probably leaving room to tab charge it later and force a plea.
[–] goatboy 3 points 2 points 5 points (+5|-3) ago (edited ago)
One of the lesser known parts of the Patriot Act is no one can be charged with murder or attempted murder on a McDonald's property without also charging McDonald's with the same crime for serving McDonald's food. As you can imagine, most prosecutors don't want to get into that fight.