The Future of the Felony Murder Rule in Florida: Calls for Reform



Written by R. A. Stewart

The Felony rule is applicable to any crime when someone dies as a result of a separate crime. For example, a group of people may rob someone but if the victim dies as a result of the robbery then all participants in the robbery are equally guilty of the victims death. 

This legal doctrine operates under the assumption that those engaged in serious criminal activity should bear responsibility for the foreseeable consequences of their actions, including the unintended deaths that may arise from their criminal endeavours.

This has resulted in people being sentenced to life without parole for a murder which they did not commit.

 The prosecution must demonstrate that the death was a foreseeable consequence of the felony. This does not mean the felon must have intended the death, but rather that it was a reasonable outcome of engaging in the criminal act.

Consider a scenario where two individuals rob a convenience store. During the robbery, a store employee attempts to intervene, and in the ensuing chaos, the employee is fatally shot—either by a co-conspirator or an unintentional discharge of a firearm. Under the felony rule, both robbers could be charged with murder, even if neither pulled the trigger. The rationale is that they were engaged in a dangerous felony, and the death was a foreseeable consequence of their criminal actions.

Each case needs to be treated on it’s own merits and sentences should be given according to those circumstances.

The Felony Rule does allow lack of intent as an excuse for participants of a fatal crime, The factors which some courts use is whether the death could be foreseeable as a result of the felony. 

The Felony Rule can lead to disproportionate sentences, punishing individuals who may not have had any intent to kill or even to cause harm. It also highlights concerns about fairness, particularly in cases where individuals may not have directly contributed to the death but are nonetheless charged with murder due to their involvement in the underlying felony.

Here is a case which occurred in Florida in 2010; Jennifer Mee, then aged nineteen agreed to go out on a date with a young man she contacted on social media. Her motive was robbery, and with the help of her two male colleagues, tried to mug the victim but he was fatally shot in the process. There was never any intent on the part of Jennifer to kill the young man who thought he was going on a date, and Jennifer could not have foreseen the possibility that he would be shot.

Certainly, it is the person in possession of the firearm who needs to be the one responsible for it’s discharge and no one else.

Jennifer and her two male colleagues were all sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole.

This seems out of proportion to her role in the crime. 

Two important points:

1. Jennifer was unarmed

2. There was no intent to kill the victim.

3. Jennifer could not have foreseen the possibility of the tragedy.

4. The two involved in this crime, including Jennifer, are not responsible for what the other person did with the firearm.

According to Florida law, all participants in a fatal robbery are equally guilty or murder whether they committed the actual killing or not. It does not take into account whether there was any intent involved. There is no room for any amount of discretion in this law. This is a law which needs to be addressed, so I have started a petition to change this. 

Read and sign the petition by clicking on the link below:

https://bit.ly/30KWYcA

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

American injustic

Image
Written by R. A. Stewart In 2010 Florida women Jennifer Mee was convicted of first degree murder. “Was the death premeditated” “No” Was the death intentional “No” Was the death malicious “No” Did Jennifer actually kill the victim “No” Then why was she found guilty? The answer Under Florida law all participants in a fatal robbery are equally guilty of murder. Is it right... that someone who had no intention to murder can face the same charges as someone who committed the murder? And spend the rest of their life in prison... for a murder she did not commit... but... she is guilty according to Florida law. The worst part of it is that there is no room for a judge to use their discretion. This law is known as “The Feloney Rule.” Florida is not the only state where this law is applicable. A petition is circulation as part of a campaign to change this situation. You can see details on this on the link below: Change.org Abolish the Felony Murder Rule in America!! At Change.org there is a peti...
Read more

The difference between first and second degree murder in Florida

Image
The difference between first and second degree murder in Florida The difference between first and second degree murder in Florida can be summed up in one word, "Premeditation." Was the death intentional? What kind of planning went into the fatality is the difference between first and second degree murder. Premeditation is not the only circumstance which can lead to an individual being charged with first degree murder.  When someone commits another crime such as robbery which results in the death of another person then the resulting charge of those who were responsible will be first degree murder. In Florida as in many other states, all participants in a fatal robbery will be charged with first degree murder; whether they had anything to do with the fatality or not. This is an area which many people believe needs to be looked at and there are several reasons for this; the main one being that the person who pulls trigger should be the one solely responsible for the fatality....
Read more

Florida law change campaign

Image
Florida law change campaign In Florida as in many other states of America, anyone who is a party to a fatal robbery is as equally guilty of committing the murder as the person who did the actual killing. It does not make any difference whether or not there was any intention to kill the victim. If you are part of the crowd  who were involved in the death of another person then you are guilty.  What kind of a sentence do you think a person who was a party to a murder receive? 10 years? 20 years? 30 years? Would you believe life without the possibility of parole. How can this be justified? If your son or daughter found themselves in this situation how would you feel? I am calling for a law change which will recognise that these folk who may have been a party to a person's death have actually committed manslaughter if even that. There needs to be a change of law which changes the definition of felony murder that significantly reduces the possibility of a defendant being unfairly ...
Read more