|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
#1
06-08-2005, 03:57 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I Always Thought There Was NO Statute Of Limitations On Murder...WTF?!
Kin Rage Over '82 Slayer's Release
New Jersey - The family of a teenager beaten to death with a hammer is furious that her killer was set free moments after being convicted. A jury found Marc Ferrara of Lyndhurst, New Jersey, guilty of aggravated manslaughter this week in the 1982 death of 17-year-old Rosie Lorincz. However, there was a five-year statute of limitations on the crime in 1982, so Ferrara won't do any time. "It just doesn't seem fair," said Andrea Lorincz, the victim's sister. "He walks free, and we are left without a sister and a daughter, and no justice." Had he been convicted of murder - for which there is no statute of limitations - Ferrara, 43, could have been sentenced to life in prison. Because of a Supreme Court ruling that prevents a judge from telling a jury someone can go free even with a guilty verdict, jurors were unaware of the disparity between the two types of convictions. Ferrara's lawyer, Dennis McAlevy, said there was no choice but to let his client walk. "The law is what it is, and anybody that's blaming the judge for following the law is obviously mistaken] at the least," he said. "In this country, we don't let the jury get involved in punishment." The case had remained open until 2002, when Ferrara's sister told cops her brother made her help him get rid of Lorincz's body by dumping it into the Hudson River. The body, which surfaced nine days after the slaying, was exhumed and identified via DNA testing.
__________________
...  If you can't dazzle 'em with brilliance...Baffle 'em with bullshit My Karma ran over my Dogma God WAS my co-pilot...But, we crashed in the mountains and...I had to eat him I'm suffocating in what's become of me... The rancid remains of what I used to be 
|
|
#2
06-08-2005, 04:03 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Because it was manslaughter, there is a statute of limitations. If it had even been 2nd degree murder, there would not have been. Gotta love the court system. WSemantics can make the difference between justice and a scumbag going free.
I am also of the mind that sexual crimes should have no statute... She says no, you do it anyway, you will pay eventually. End of story.
__________________
Some misguided people decided I was funny enough to pay. See if they're right: http://www.cracked.com/members/Vodstok/ (I tweet pretty hardcore, too)
|
|
#3
06-10-2005, 08:11 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
It isn't semantics. There is generally a big difference in what goes into common law murder or first degree murder (statute) and manslaughter. With that said, I don't know why NJ has a SOL on manslaughter. That is idiotic. Maybe this case will change that in the future.
|
|
#4
06-10-2005, 08:21 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
How can 'the law' be so stupid?
__________________
... If you can't dazzle 'em with brilliance...Baffle 'em with bullshit My Karma ran over my Dogma God WAS my co-pilot...But, we crashed in the mountains and...I had to eat him I'm suffocating in what's become of me... The rancid remains of what I used to be
|
|
#5
06-10-2005, 10:13 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
Just listen to this sentence and tell me what it means. I haven't seen Evil Dead II yet? Would you get the impression that i wanted to see it? Oh, well you couldn't have been dying to see it or else you would have already gone. So in your opinion would I definitely see it? How the fuck should I know probably! Why? Because it's a brilliant film, it's so funny, and the soundtrack kicks fucking ass!
|
|
#6
06-11-2005, 09:54 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Generally there are four categories. 1. First Degree Murder (it is a statute in that jurisdiction) 2. Common Law Murder (sometimes called 2nd Degree Murder) 3. Voluntary Manslaughter 4. Involuntary Manslaughter Without having the evidence here, I have no idea why the jury selected #3 instead of #2 or #1 (assuming NY has #1). Maybe the guy didn't beat her with a hammer like the article leads you to believe. Maybe they fought and he threw the hammer at her and didn't have the intent to be common law murder.
|
 |
|
|
