What's gonna happen to Huguely?
-
James Burton: "I think that, based on what I've heard, it sounds like he probably will get convicted for involuntary manslaughter."Laura Ingles -
Kathleen Christian: "What I hope happens is that he gets life in prison because I definitely think he's guilty."Laura Ingles -
Stewart Stevens: "It looks like they're gonna pursue a life sentence, and I hope justice is served because I think they've got enough compelling evidence to convict."Laura Ingles
Read more on: Question of the week
15 comments
Whoa, that first dude looks like Andy Dick on Prednisone.
R.I.P.: Phil Hartman
Oops, almost forgot...
Kudos to The Hook for finding someone on the Mall who is wearing a "Blue Man Group" neckie-thing. That was a find divine!
R.I.P.: Divine
He walks on an involuntary manslaughter conviction, with time served. Supervised probation for six years. It is after all Charlottesville, and rich UVa students have immunity. The lax program continues to crank out first class jerks, and Starsia keeps bringing them here to C-ville.
or perhaps get the Robert Chambers verdict and sentence and then walks for a year and finds himself back in teh slammer for 45 years..............
Allow me to preface my response to the question by stating that, based upon what I witnessed in the courtroom and through various and sundry accounts thereafter, I believe that Dave Chapman, Commonwealth's Attorney, did an admirable job presenting evidence to support the state's case. He was thorough, tenacious, dogged, and made every reasonable attempt to leave no stone unturned in anticipation of the various strategies that will surely be pursued by the defense--a defense case that will by all accounts run through Saturday and well into next week).
That said, my non-expert opinion is that the case against George Huguely will result in a conviction of involuntary manslaughter. I have stated in other threads that I hope I am wrong in that prediction but harbor little hope that I am.
Observer, as someone who has seen Dave Chapman in action before and has heard all the reports out there, I agree with you on the job he has done - and kudos to him, the staff at the CA Office and the courts.
I hope we are wrong and he gets more than manslaughter but like you, I am bracing myself for that result too. (He is lucky we are not on the Jury.)
Cville Native, I was called some years ago to serve on a jury on a capital murder case but was dismissed by the judge for good reason. [He and I both knew that, for reasons, I would unable to serve with any degree of objectivity nor would I be able to reasonably consider all potential outcomes.]
The same would be true had I been called to serve in this case, although I'd have been dismissed for different reasons. In the instant (Huguely) case, I would have had to have been direct and candid in stating that I have already formed an opinion--and a strong one, at that--regarding Huguely's guilt.
I think this young man is guilty as sin--at least of the second charge of felony murder--and do not mind admitting as much.
He will get a sentence that the jury thinks they can profit the most from.
Fairly difficult for a prosecution case to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a defendent committed a pre-meditated murder..........we shall see how the jury feels they did.
Agreed, SkipD; ergo, my comment about a conviction on felony murder.
Murder 2 or, if he's lucky, man 1
I hope that the cross will eliminate any reasonable doubt
Larceny (her laptop): guilty. Felony murder (death occurs in the course of committing a separate crime, i.e. stealing the laptop): guilty. Either manslaughter (a reckless accidental killing), or, 2nd degree murder (rage killing): guilty. But first degree (premeditated) murder? Not guilty. There is evidence to suggest premeditation, but not beyond a reasonable doubt. A jury might surprise you, but this jury (with the exception of one alternate) has been paying very close attention, taking careful notes, and it is unlikely they will do something utterly unexpected.
Lawyer- I concur.................the defense is doing all they can eliminate the M1 charge. Reasonable doubt will most likely prevail..........
2nd degree I can fathom, involuntary? That would be an insult. But apparently there is a UVA contingent on the jury so justice is very much in question.