Uh huh, I see what you did there.
It wasn't a rip crew, it was a crew devised to kill Border Patrol agents.
From the article: "Last week, the Washington Times offered a new version of the encounter: they reported that the rip crew was not hunting illegals, but Border Patrol teams — with the intention of engaging them in combat."
EVEN IF it was a rip crew which was interested in robbing mules of drugs and money, then it would still be Murder.
E.g., if I agree with another individual, I'll pick a name at random, Jay E. Hoover, to rob a bank and something "goes wrong" and Jay E. Hoover shoots a bank employee, I'm still in for Murder.
Sources now tell PJ Media that neither version of events is accurate: the rip crew was not waiting for a chance encounter with other illegals, nor did the members intend to engage American law enforcement agents.
The rip crew was in Peck Canyon that evening with the intention of stealing money and drugs from a specific shipment of which they had prior knowledge.
The tinfoil is with you, young Freeman, but you are not a Jedi yet
So, it's only murder if federal agents were the targets of the Murder plot?
If the rip crew was targeting the drugs, I don't see how the FBI can be held accountable unless they knew that the BP unit Terry was in was going to be at the same place at the same time.
Oh, yeah, before I forget, remember that thread where people were freaking out that the CCS on the criminal prosecution was sealed by the federal judge and I poo-poo'd the hysteria?
I'm sorry to be so blase. This is much, much worse than I had reckoned.
This is nuclear.
It may be a bit naive attributing this to a particular administration.
If the article is accurate, by law it does not matter if it was Robbery or a Premeditated Murder.
You know how the Felony Murder Rule works, right?
Anything Holder says or does is treasonous and Anti-American!! Head of the Justice Dept?? What a joke!! Contempt? Oh YEAH!!! For him and ANYONE who takes orders from him!I think it's far worse than even this, if the REAL facts ever all get out. I believe this was all intentional to create anti-gun hysteria to give this admin the green light to start grabbing guns.
But I don't believe, given the latest information, that they were willfully complicit with intent.
Here's a question for you: narcotics knows of a drug deal scheduled to take place between two parties that have historically had a rocky relationship. They plan to monitor and act accordingly. They do not inform all uniformed LE when or where this deal is taking place. Denny happens to be rolling by in his patrol car when the deal goes south and they start shooting at each other. He engages, is shot, and later dies from his wounds.
Is narcotics complicit in his death?
1. You don't need the intent to commit Murder only the intent to commit Robbery for Felony Murder. If a Murder happens in the course of the Robbery=Murder.
Felony murder rule - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
2. A prosecution would need knowingly, a high probability of something occuring. You could easily argue that there was a high probability of somone getting hurt while the FBI's agent was out plotting robberies (with guns supplied by .gov no less) while Border Patrol is rattling around the border.
Let's use a generic "police officer" and no INGOers.
If narcotics has armed the CI with both weapons and intelligence, then yes it would be foreseeable that a drug transaction of that nature could become violent and Conspiracy to Commit Murder would be possible.
If narcotics has no CI is just recording, if narcotics arranged the transaction then could be liable under Depraved Heart, Reckless Homicide.
If just recording and no pre-action taken, then I do not believe there would be any criminal liability.
So you see no difference between a legal definition and a practical real-world definition that considers more of the facts than the limited legal parameters under scrutiny?
Here's a question for you: narcotics knows of a drug deal scheduled to take place between two parties that have historically had a rocky relationship. They plan to monitor and act accordingly. They do not inform all uniformed LE when or where this deal is taking place. Denny happens to be rolling by in his patrol car when the deal goes south and they start shooting at each other. He engages, is shot, and later dies from his wounds.
Is narcotics complicit in his death?
I'm not arguing whether or not his death was murder. I said so in my previous post. I'm trying to figure out if the FBI can be held complicit if they didn't know he was going to be there.
If the rip crew was targeting the drugs, I don't see how the FBI can be held accountable unless they knew that the BP unit Terry was in was going to be at the same place at the same time.
If the article is accurate, by law it does not matter if it was Robbery or a Premeditated Murder.
You know how the Felony Murder Rule works, right?