What the hung jury in the Larry King case means

[dsc]

http://www.bilerico.com/2011/09/what_the_hung_jury_means_in_the_larry_king_murder.php#.TmDhvZ43Na4.facebook

The jury in the trial of Brandon McInerney, who killed Larry King because he was gay or trans, has notified the judge of their inability to reach a verdict, and has been discharged. There will either be a plea deal or a retrial. But the question that must be on everyone's mind is what the jury was thinking.

My guess as to the likely reason that the jury could not reach a verdict is that there was disagreement as to whether McInerney acted in the "heat of passion." The other potential interpretations don't make any sense. The "heat of passion" defense, when the "passion" offered is that the victim was gay or transgender, is what we colloquially know as the "gay panic" defense, or "trans panic" defense. (Although there is some evidence that King was questioning his gender identity and even referred to himself by a female name at times, the crux of the defense is based on alleged sexual advances and McInerney's homophobia, and so I refer to the defense employed here as a "gay panic" defense rather than a "trans panic" defense.)

The charge against McInerney was first degree murder. The definition of first degree murder in California law is the unlawful killing of a human being, or a fetus, with malice aforethought. "Malice aforethought" essentially means, in this context, that the defendant formed the intent to kill prior to the act that caused death. First degree murder is punishable by death (not applicable here due to McInerney's age), imprisonment in the state prison for life without the possibility of parole, or imprisonment in the state prison for a term of 25 years to life, depending on aggravating or mitigating circumstances. (If the crime was committed because of the actual or perceived sexual orientation of the victim, then the minimum punishment is life imprisonment without parole.)

The first degree charge in this case is justified by the fact indicating that McInerney formed an intent to kill prior to the act that caused death. These include remarks made to another student the day before the murder suggesting that McInerney was going to murder King. There was also the fact that McInerney brought a gun to school, which was not revealed until seconds before it was discharged into the body of Lawrence King.

end of quote

I admit that maybe some were taken aback by his age but frankly I think it was more likely a toleration of gay panic. The hate crime charge was universally rejected. It really is that bad. I hope a new jury gets a chance to go after one of the murder counts but I can understand why a prosecutor would decide not to recharge the murders. Any recharge though as to be as an adult. I would rather lose outright than see him get a mere 8 year sentence in kiddie court.

[Ken Burch]

1. Wouldn't surprise me.

California is the state where a jury once said it was ok to murder the only openly gay member of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors (and the progressive mayor) if you tested positive for Twinkies.

[WhiteTara]

2. Rest in Peace Larry King. May justice come

in the next.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

3. At a practical level it does not mean a damn thing

No one was holding out for not guilty, which for me was the key item. Many do not agree with hate crime enhancements or trying a child that young in adult court, including myself.

At this point it is back to the DA who may accept a plea bargain at this point.

[msongs]

4. possession and use of a gun = intent to commit murder..unless its a queer of course nt

[ProgressiveProfessor]

5. The Government most likely will never get a murder conviction

Why and if it would be different if the ages/gender/ethnicity/races were different is good discussion fodder and nothing more.

The judge will have to approve the settlement and impose sentence. Not sure what his bail status is.

Some of us have serious concerns about treating 14 year olds like adults as often as we do. Not having access to the detail information, its not clear if it was appropriate here or not.

[Swede]

6. 14 year olds should not be tried as adults.

As any progressive or liberal should know. Heck,here in Canada,anyone 17 or younger charged with a crime has their identity hidden.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

10. I do not know any adult who is not at least uncomfortable with trying juveniles as adults

There are cases where it is warranted but it is very situational. Not sure why it happened in this case.

[dsc]

11. I frankly can't find a more fitting case

This was premeditated, first degree murder.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

12. I am not sure what the standards are here in California

The act prima facie should not be enough. Not sure if the proceedings where the judge moved the case to adult court are even open to the public. Any insights on any of that?

[dsc]

13. I don't know either

some have nearly defacto age standards. In NC, pretty much any violent crime committed age 16 or up gets adult status while less than 16 don't. Others look at age and crime.

[dsc]

8. that jury supposedly had no one on it who thought that 14 was too young to be tried as an adult

[ProgressiveProfessor]

9. I assume that was based on Voir Dire...

we all know what that is worth

[kenny blankenship]

7. "If they're gay, fire away."