• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Loan your car, Go to jail

 
 
 
Man gets life sentence for loaning his car



http://www.thenation.com/article/17...e-prison-lending-out-his-car-and-going-sleep#

  1. The law is insane
  2. The jury was insane

Meanwhile, a major bank got caught laundering millions of dollars in drug money and got away scott free. Some rich kid used the "affluenza" defense to excuse killing several people while driving drunk. But this guy loans his car to his roommate and gets a life sentence.

We don't have a justice system, we have an injustice system.
 
AthenaAwakened said:
http://www.policymic.com/articles/8...ife-in-prison-for-lending-his-car-to-a-friend

Too bad he wasn't afflicted with affluenza. The judge would have driven him home and bought him ice cream
Click to expand...

Can't be. I thought Florida only applied draconian laws to blacks. :rolleyes:

Seriously though, while I see a utility in felony murder statutes, I think Florida's law goes way too far:
- a felony murder should be at most a 2nd degree murder. 1st degree murder should be restricted to premeditation and direct involvement.
- there should be a limit on the degree of involvement. This is a grey area though - obviously the prosecutor (any word if it was the infamous Angela Corey?) argued that he knew that a robbery would take place and gave them the car in full knowledge of it. He even admits they talked about robbing the dealer. Moral of the story - don't hang around thugs and don't lend them stuff they will go and use to commit felonies because you may be criminally culpable for providing them the means to commit them.
 
laughing dog said:
Was the manufacturer of the shotgun used to bludgeon the victim to death also convicted of felony murder?
Click to expand...
Because the manufacturer of the shotgun did not give it to them the shotgun after they told him of their plans to go and rob a drug dealer. I agree that Florida felony murder law is overly harsh and broad but it's not completely arbitrary like you imply here.
 
Last edited:
Bronzeage said:
I don't see anyone making this argument about guns.
Click to expand...
You do not think that he'd have been convicted of the same crime if he loaned them the shotgun instead?
The argument was not about cars in general but about this specific car and Holle's previous knowledge of the robbery - he claims he though it was a joke but that sounds a bit hollow to me.
NY Times said:
“All he did was go say, ‘Use the car,’ ” Mr. Allen said of Mr. Holle in a pretrial deposition. “I mean, nobody really knew that girl was going to get killed. It was not in the plans to go kill somebody, you know.”
But Mr. Holle did testify that he had been told it might be necessary to “knock out” Jessica Snyder. Mr. Holle is 25 now, a tall, lean and lively man with a rueful sense of humor, alert brown eyes and an unusually deep voice. In a spare office at the prison here, he said that he had not taken the talk of a burglary seriously.
“I honestly thought they were going to get food,” he said of the men who used his car, all of whom had attended the nightlong party at Mr. Holle’s house, as had Jessica Snyder.
Click to expand...
Serving Life for Providing Car to Killers
He was also offered a 10 year plea deal which he refused.
Now the crime and sentence are overly draconian I agree but there is a good case to be made about Holle as an accomplice to the robbery. Interestingly though, wouldn't Jessica's mother be liable for the murder under the same "felony murder" doctrine? After all a pound is felony quantity and there is a logical progression of "no drugs in safe, no robbery, no dead Jessica". People have been known to be charged with felony murder when one of their accomplices gets shot, so the fact that Jessica was on "her side" doesn't really matter.
 
Last edited:
For a decade old case it's pretty amazing we have two threads being started on it. Like it was late breaking news or something. :)
 
Derec said:
Because the manufacturer of the shotgun did not give it to them the shotgun after they told him of their plans to go and rob a drug dealer.
Click to expand...
Shotguns are used by violence. Without the shotgun, there was no murder. It is exactly the same argument for the lender of the car.
Derec said:
I agree that Florida felony murder law is overly harsh and broad but it's completely arbitrary like you imply here.
Click to expand...
If you agree it is arbitrary, why are you arguing?
 
Derec said:
No, not the same at all as I explained.
Click to expand...
Your explanation is insufficient. In both cases, the absence meant no murder. The young man in this case did not think he was lending his car to be used in a crime. The prosecutor's logic of "no car, no murder" works as logically as "no shotgun, no murder".
 
laughing dog said:
The young man in this case did not think he was lending his car to be used in a crime. The prosecutor's logic of "no car, no murder" works as logically as "no shotgun, no murder".
Click to expand...
Completely wrong! The "young man" in question knew that a robbery was to take place. He also knew that they planned to knock out the victim as part of said robbery. He still gave them the car. That makes him an accomplice.
Do I think he deserves life in prison? No, but neither is he innocent.
 
Derec said:
Completely wrong! The "young man" in question knew that a robbery was to take place. He also knew that they planned to knock out the victim as part of said robbery. He still gave them the car. That makes him an accomplice.
Click to expand...
According to OP article
Holle was vaguely aware of talks about a robbery, but told a reporter, "I thought they were just playing around. ... I honestly didn't understand what was going on."
Click to expand...
which means you are completely wrong: he did know anything of the sort.
Derec said:
Do I think he deserves life in prison? No, but neither is he innocent.
Click to expand...
According to the linked article, he is as innocent as the shotgun manufacturer or even the parents of the actual murders using the prosecutor's reasoning.
 
AthenaAwakened said:
http://www.policymic.com/articles/8...ife-in-prison-for-lending-his-car-to-a-friend

Too bad he wasn't afflicted with affluenza. The judge would have driven him home and bought him ice cream
Click to expand...

That is absolute horseshit

- - - Updated - - -

Underseer said:
Meanwhile, a major bank got caught laundering millions of dollars in drug money and got away scott free. Some rich kid used the "affluenza" defense to excuse killing several people while driving drunk. But this guy loans his car to his roommate and gets a life sentence.

We don't have a justice system, we have an injustice system.
Click to expand...
exactly!
 
It sounds like Holle was too drunk to give meaningful consent to participating in a robbery (not that he did, anyway), but is being punished because he didn't say "No" when his friend wanted to borrow his car.

But that's how they roll in Florida. You can shoot dead an unarmed person you think might be planning to throw popcorn at you, but don't let your friend borrow your car. You can go to prison for that.
 
Derec said:
Because the manufacturer of the shotgun did not give it to them the shotgun after they told him of their plans to go and rob a drug dealer. I agree that Florida felony murder law is overly harsh and broad but it's not completely arbitrary like you imply here.
Click to expand...

You don't see anything arbitrary about giving someone a life sentence for loaning out their car?

Is there no abuse of power by the government that you won't make excuses for?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom