Mushrooms are a hell of a drug!
SPEEDY MCCREADY
Posts: 25,749
Take me piece by piece.....
Till there aint nothing left worth taking away from me.....
Till there aint nothing left worth taking away from me.....
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
_____________________________
It makes much more sense, to live
In the present tense
What kind of SHIT lawyer did he have that didn't go for "temporary insanity" based on being on fucking MUSHROOMS?
Wow.
Defense Attorney Epic Fail.
If I opened it now would you not understand?
I hear what you are saying... he could be an idiot. Or could be he is taking responsibility for his brutal crime. If I recall correctly, the piece said he didn't want to drag his family through a trial and that he didn't want to testify (from the tone of the piece... it seems as if he feels shame- which he should!).
We always get pissed when these types of losers, desperate to save their sorry ass hides, claim all sorts of shit to keep them from facing appropriate consequences for their obscenity. It's refreshing to see a loser such as this just accept his fate. I have more respect for this guy than, say, a James Holmes or Michael Rafferty- playing the system for all it's worth.
I'm not defending the guy's actions,
but for christ sake, have you ever done mushrooms?
It is an experience that can go HORRIBLY wrong,
and you are VERIFIABLY ***INSANE*** on them.
And again, "1st degree murder" is, no pun, OVERKILL by a mile.
What is premeditated about being hopped up on hallucinogens and insanely murdering your friend?
You think he would have done it sober?
You think he was PLANNING to do it, sober?
If answer=no, 1st Degree=no
If I opened it now would you not understand?
Hey... don't get me wrong. I am not attacking you. I completely understand your legal argument and, for the record, whether right or wrong... there is a legitimate defence case here that our current legal system allows for.
I am well aware of how brutal shrooms can be on the psyche. All I am saying is that in this particular case... it at least appears that the guy is prepared to accept responsibility for the crime he committed regardless of the factors that might have contributed to the act.
If it was me... I would have a difficult time facing my victim's family and our mutual friends in court trying to 'excuse' or 'rationalize' my responsibility. Without really knowing, I think that's what is going on here- because as you say... there is a defence argument that could easily be made.
i know.
what i am trying to say is this guy accepted responsibility for a crime he did not commit.
He was NOT GUILTY of PREMEDITATION!
*First degree murder is any murder that is willful and premeditated. Felony murder is typically first degree.[5][6]
*Second degree murder is a murder that is not premeditated or planned in advance.[7]
*Voluntary manslaughter sometimes called a "Heat of Passion" murder, is any intentional killing that involved no prior intent to kill, and which was committed under such circumstances that would "cause a reasonable person to become emotionally or mentally disturbed." Both this and second degree murder are committed on the spot, but the two differ in the magnitude of the circumstances surrounding the crime. For example, a bar fight that results in death would ordinarily constitute second degree murder. If that same bar fight stemmed from a discovery of infidelity, however, it may be mitigated to voluntary manslaughter.[8]
*Involuntary manslaughter stems from a lack of intention to cause death but involving an intentional, or negligent, act leading to death. A drunk driving-related death is typically involuntary manslaughter. Note that the "unintentional" element here refers to the lack of intent to bring about the death. All three crimes above feature an intent to kill, whereas involuntary manslaughter is "unintentional," because the killer did not intend for a death to result from his intentional actions. If there is a presence of intention it relates only to the intent to cause a violent act which brings about the death, but not an intention to bring about the death itself. [9]
There is no justice in accepting responsibility for a crime you are not guilty of.
Of the above, WHICH do you think he was GUILTY of?
I'm sorry.
I don't understand why it would be more agreeable to the family of the deceased to put away a man who was a FRIEND of the deceased for a crime he did not commit.
:(
if i killed my friend on mushrooms, i would feel HORRIBLE guilt and shame.
But i wouldn't accept a 1st Degree Murder Plea. That is nearly as insane as the commited act.
If I opened it now would you not understand?
I'm hearing you. I'm only speculating based on what I read- I could be waaay off base. It may well be a case of negligence on the part of the defence attorney as you suggested. Given the higher profile of it though, it is likely that my speculation might be legitimate (I'm sure legal experts have made the potential defence position clear).
As far as the family goes... I think the family might not be too willing to think that the guy 'never committed the crime'. I would wager that- given the nature of the crime- the family is thinking that the guy needs to be charged to the full extent of the law. Semantics aside, I don't think they are saddened by this guy being charged with and pleading guilt to first degree murder.
I've had nothing but good times.
I did a LOT of schrooms in the 70's and 80's and some acid but I can honestly say I never wanted to eat my friends heart nor did I ever have a battle between good and evil and wake up with blood running down my chin,
I wonder if there is a new strain of schrooms that I have not tried ?.....wait I did see dawn of the dead in a walk in theater in about 1979-80 while I was frying .....what a rush that was. :shock:
Godfather.
This is like the gun argument to me, you don't blame the gun and you don't blame the mushroom.
The first time I took acid I watched Eraserhead, followed by Pink Floyd's 'The Wall'. Laughed my ass off through both films. Could never see Henry in quite the same light again.