• superkret@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    107
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    17 days ago

    According to NY legal code, it is not murder if:

    The defendant acted under the influence of extreme emotional disturbance for which there was a reasonable explanation or excuse, the reasonableness of which is to be determined from the viewpoint of a person in the defendant’s situation under the circumstances as the defendant believed them to be.

      • MartianSands@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        17 days ago

        On the colloquial sense, sure, but it’s entirely possible (and would be hilarious) for the legal definition not to agree

        • comfy@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          17 days ago

          How so? (sincere question)

          edit: I misread and thought it was claiming a specific legal possibility

          • MartianSands@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            17 days ago

            I’m not specifically saying that this particular case isn’t murder, but if the quote we’re all responding to is accurate then there’s explicitly a way it could be considered “not murder”. I know absolutely nothing about the relevant law, but legal definitions not quite matching common sense definitions is the case more often than not, I think

            • comfy@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              17 days ago

              Interestingly, I just saw a post claiming:

              According to NY legal code, it is not murder if:

              The defendant acted under the influence of extreme emotional disturbance for which there was a reasonable explanation or excuse, the reasonableness of which is to be determined from the viewpoint of a person in the defendant’s situation under the circumstances as the defendant believed them to be.

              Given how composed they are and premeditated it was, I’m not sure if this is in the spirit of the legal clause, but it could be… interpreted liberally by a judge.

            • comfy@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              17
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              17 days ago

              Thanks for supplying your legal expertise pro bono, but we’re going to need a citation of relevant legislative definition if you’re going to make broad claims like that about legal matters.

      • reddit_sux@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        17 days ago

        Yes so is capital punishment, wars and just like those this is also justified. He was judged by millions of his victims and his peers and executed.

        • belastend@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          17 days ago

          I mean it was murder. Premeditated, planned etc.

          But he murdered the right person :)

              • reddit_sux@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                17 days ago

                Absolutely but in extremes of cases maybe it is justified.

                He was a mass murderer so in this case IMHO it is justified.

                • belastend@slrpnk.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  17 days ago

                  It was necessary, because he was not going to see punishment otherwise.

                  In a just society, he’d be in jail forever. Once again, Fuck the Capital Punishment, even in extreme Cases.

                  • reddit_sux@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    17 days ago

                    Put him in jail forever and make him pay for his confinement. I don’t think he should b a burden on the people he exploited.

                • balsoft@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  17 days ago

                  I don’t think capital punishment (murdering a helpless person in custody) is ever justified. It’s just cruelty for the sake of cruelty.

                  What we have here could be an act of societal self-defense, where the target was in the process of actively harming millions of people, and the legal system wasn’t doing anything to stop it. Whether or not it was self-defense or just a pre-paid hit for some other reason I can’t say, and neither can I judge whether it was justified or not. I just think it’s categorically different from capital punishment.

                  • reddit_sux@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    17 days ago

                    Capital punishment is state sanctioned, that is the only difference in my eyes.

                    I can think of some cases where I would rather spend money on something better than housing criminals and just end their life.

              • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                10
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                17 days ago

                After someone’s responsible for the deaths of thousands, and suffering of millions more? Even beyond what he did or didn’t “deserve,” it was simply a practical choice to put him down and prevent him from hurting anyone else.

                • mke_geek@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  18
                  ·
                  17 days ago

                  He didn’t kill anyone.

                  You’re saying that anyone who works at any company should be killed. (Including yourself assuming you actually have a job.)

                  • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    7
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    17 days ago

                    United healthcare has the highest denial rate the in country. He’s absolutely killed thousands, and would’ve killed many more.

                    I’m not saying anyone should be killed. But anyone who makes a living on the deaths of others certainly deserves it. For example, even assembly line workers for manufacturing white phosphorus or cluster bombs. There are some types of income that are unjustifiable.

                  • ubergeek@lemmy.today
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    17 days ago

                    An argument could be made for “yes”, and with nuance, the justification gets stronger the higher up the food chain you go.