As I always say, being an ex-con makes me somewhat of a subject matter expert of most things all criminal justicey.  Articles like the one analyzed earlier today always make me want to jump through my laptop and choke the person writing this nonsense.  I agree, however, with Leon Collins when he correctly stated that the only reason why Your Black World jumped all over this is because they thought they had another case of the system railroading another brother.  We only find out later the guy is a white guy.

First, lets take the misidentification of this guy’s ethnicity out of the equation. Lets assume for the sake of argument he is black. Now let me explain why it is sometimes better to not have ANY information about a subject than misleading, incomplete or downright erroneous information. As Leon said, they should have gotten their story correct before blasting it across the web and getting everyone up in arms about a guy that is 1. Not black and 2. Guilty as all get out.

 

To find a face of injustice in this country, again assuming this guy is black, this is the wrong case to use. This is true for a number of reasons. Let us now examine this psuedo-black guy’s situation. The article uses this case as an example of the ridiculous nature of the “felony murder” rule. Wrong legal theory. The felony murder rule means that if you go into a criminal act, say for instance burglary, and someone dies during the course of that underlying felony, then by rule you are guilty of  murder. Most jurisdictions charge a defendant with at least two counts of what the layperson calls murder but in the eyes of the law is actually homicide. They will charge you with Felony Murder since you caused the death of another while in the perpetration of various ennumerated felonies, i.e. robbery, arson, burglary, carjacking, etc., the rule states that even if your intention was to commit the underlying felony, that intent is then “transferred” to the homicide making your guilty of Felony Murder. THAT is the “felony murder rule.” As an aside, this rule even goes to the extreme that if you and your co-burglar get in a shootout with the police leaving the scene and the POLICE kills your partner in crime, you will be charged with his murder under the rule, even if you didn’t even have a gun. EVERY state has these rules.

 

What the article is alluding to, quite inartfully I might add, is a term of art called accessory liability. That means that if you agree to a criminal act with someone and your guy/gal goes overboard, you are guilty of whatever he or she did even if there was not agreed upon intent to do that. For example, you and your guy go to rob the neighborhood dope dealer. You go in, you watching the door while he look for the dope. He go into the bedroom and comes out a while later. You flee the scene jump in the car and drive away. The next day your door implodes and the SWAT team is there to take you to jail. You get to the station and find out you’re charged with burglary, home invasion and RAPE AND CHILD MOLESTATION. You say to yourself, wait . . . burglary, okay did that, home invasion, check but RAPE??? CHILD MOLESTATION??? Where did that come from? What happened was when your guy went to the bedroom, he found dope but he also found the dealer’s 15 year old daughter in the bed sleep, he couldn’t control himself so he raped her. Even though you had nothing to do with that portion of the crime, because you agreed to the burglary/robbery, you are guilty of whatever else your partner in crime did.

 

You the reader would be shocked at how many people are locked up right now for crimes that they did not participate in, in fact crimes that they themselves had no knowledge was even committed. I once did a case for a guy that picked up one of his guys and gave him a ride. This guy’s friend asked him to stop at a liquor store so he could get some beer. He came back to the car and they drove off. His friend told him that if anyone asked he wasn’t with him (which was kind of hard to do because they had already been seen together by a number of people on the block). The “friend” then told him that he had robbed the liquor store and he had hit the cashier in the head with his pistol to knock her out. Because this was his guy, he said “oh well, she should have called in sick tonight.” *ensuing laughter*  Two days later the police arrest him at work and charge him with felony murder, see the cashier died of blunt force trauma to the head and since he didn’t immediately turn his friend in, he was being charged under the accessory liability clause of the homicide statute.

 

Now, as for Mr. Holle from Florida. Not only was the article wrong from a legal analysis point of view, it was also incomplete as it didn’t tell the whole story. Mr. Holle’s appeal is a matter of record, you can find it online in the State of Florida’s Court of Appeals website. The facts that were ascertained at trial was that Mr. Holle told the police in a number of statements that his friend told him that he was going to have to “knock out” the victim. He also testified as such on the stand in his own defense. So you lent him your car anyway? Damn fool, you put yourself in jail because you didn’t know at the time that your admitting just that little thing to the police makes you just as guilty for whatever your friend did.

 

Here’s the more important thing that a lot of people miss about situations like this. In trial, the burden is upon the State to prove that you did whatever despicable act that they charged you with. In this case, 12 jurors heard ALL the evidence, not just the part that internet lawyers want you to hear. They found him guilty because as the law is written, they had no choice. How so, you ask? Because under the law

 

• Mr. Holle intentionally gave the keys to his vehicle to his friend.
• Mr. Holle apparently by his own admission knew that a crime was going to be committed and even after learning of this fact, still gave him the keys.
• The friend then proceeded to kill someone.

 

By law that’s textbook accessory liability. I’m not arguing whether or not its wrong. I think the law is bullshit but it is what it is. Someone tell you they are going to kill someone, let me use your gun. DON’T GIVE HIM YOUR FUCKIN GUN, because you are going to jail along with him. Point blank, period. Another thing that people don’t understand about how the court system works is that once you are found guilty, the burden shifts. The Appeals Courts ONLY look at the evidence that is most favorable to the prosecution. Now you have to prove that you’re not guilty. Let alone the difference between being not guilty and “factually innocent,” which means there was not way you could be guilty because you were on a plane to Tahiti and you don’t even know the guy who committed the crime. We’ll deal with factual innocence in an upcoming blog.

 

In short, we need to save our collective outrage and furor for cases that are truly miscarriages of justice. This is not. This is a dumb ass white guy who didn’t know how to keep his mouth shut until he talked to counsel. (a subject that I will deal with at a later time as well)

DEEEEEErops mic and walks from stage drippin’ blackness

 

http://www.yourblackworld.net/2014/04/black-news/man-gets-life-in-prison-for-loaning-his-car-to-his-roommate/