Mushrooms v. murder: Sentences in Kansas don't all fit the crime

[beevul]

"Stephen Fletcher II tried to grow some psychedelic mushrooms in his Lawrence apartment."


"Tremain V. Scott shot and killed a man at close range during an armed confrontation, then, according to an eyewitness, took the victim's gun and shot him with it as he lay on the ground."

"Both Fletcher and Scott are in their early 20s and have little or no criminal-conviction record, their attorneys say. So who's facing the stiffer sentence?"

"Fletcher, by double."


http://www.ljworld.com/section/stateregional/story/153615


This has got to stop.

[bloom]

1. This is one of my main issues.

I wonder if it's a problem in all the states.


I don't think it is being pro-drugs to want violent crimes to carry stiffer sentences. I don't know how ANYBODY could make an argument to justify this.

I guess we all need to make it an issue with the state legislators. That is where the penalties are spelled out.

[happyslug]

2. Imperfect self defence

"Imperfect Self Defense" occurs when someone believes he is doing self Defense that is permitted by law, but uses excessive force and/or otherwise violates the requirements of Self-Defense. In such circumstances most states rule such actions are Manslaughter NOT murder.

The kicker here is Scott picked up his victim's gun and shot the victim again. THAT Act can not be viewed as legitimate self-Defense, the problem is will a jury decide it happened or did not happened.

If a jury agrees it did happen, you have a Murder Conviction (Second degree in most states for there appears to be no pre-meditation to make it First degree).

On the other hand if the Jury decides it did NOT happen, or it happened in the rush of the moment, you do not have intent to commit a crime and therefore legitimate Self-Defense. The "heat" of the moment is the key to the issue of Manslaughter and Murder. A person has the right to defend himself, but only with the force needed to defend oneself and no more. The issue is this self-Defense or "imperfect Self-Defense" i.e. Manslaughter.

Looking at this facts, I lean to Manslaughter, picking up the victim's gun and shooting the victim is difficult to show to be part of the force needed to defend oneself from the victim. On the other hand Scott can show a Jury that he did not think when he picked up the gun, just reacted, wrongly, be it was just a reaction. That makes it manslaughter not murder. IT would be hard for the prosecution to show any intent to do harm, recklessness yes, but no actual intent to kill someone.

As to the drug charge, growing psychedelic Mushrooms? Can’t the Legislature make an exception for people who grows natural items that are illegal? i.e. make growing psychedelic mushrooms the same as growing marijuana and say the mere growing of such plants does not make the act of growing “manufacturing”. Poorly written statutes and get tough on crime politicians go hand in hand, and we should tell people such horror stories like this one, where killing a person can draw a lesser time in jail than growing mushrooms.

[beevul]

3. You nailed it.

"Poorly written statutes and get tough on crime politicians go hand in hand, and we should tell people such horror stories like this one, where killing a person can draw a lesser time in jail than growing mushrooms."



Well said.

I'm afraid of how many would even listen nowdays though.