kittythehare
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2016
- Messages
- 18,562
- Reaction score
- 109,054
Sounds right to me. If the death penalty is still on the table he may give up the body location to save his skin-if there is a body.
This is a long read but explains much . particularly some of the terms used in the indictment, their meaning.
This was a landmark case, its about the death penalty but its most informative
https://law.resource.org/pub/us/case/reporter/F3/486/486.F3d.13.04-6001.html
WARNING- its a very long read but its beautifully written.
As I told you earlier, as a matter of law, premeditated murder alone is not sufficient to make the death penalty a sentencing option. Something more is required. More specifically, one of those "something mores" with regard to murder is that a murder must be committed in an especially heinous, cruel, or depraved manner. However, a person of ordinary sensibility could fairly characterize almost every murder as heinous, cruel, or depraved, the Supreme Court has said. Therefore, something additional must be proven to make this a truly limiting factor and to assure reasonable consistency between cases. In this case, the law provides that the killing can only be especially heinous, cruel, or depraved if it involved serious physical abuse . . . . In this case, "especially" has its usual meaning of highly or unusually great. Each of the other relevant terms has a defined meaning for the purposes of the Federal Death Penalty statute. I'll now explain those meanings to you.
[FONT="]105
"Heinous" means shockingly atrocious. In this case, a killing may be found to be especially heinous only as a result of any serious physical abuse that's proven.[/FONT]
[FONT="]106
"Cruel" means the defendant intended to inflict a high degree of pain. In this case, a killing may be found to be especially cruel only as a result of any serious physical abuse that is proven.[/FONT]
[FONT="]107
"Depraved" means that the defendant relished the killing or showed indifference to the suffering of the victim. Once again, in this case, a killing may be found to be especially depraved only as a result of any serious physical abuse that is proven."Serious physical abuse" has a particular legal meaning for the purpose of this case. To prove that the killing . . . involved serious physical abuse, the government must prove that Mr. Sampson intended to inflict significant damage to [the deceased's] body beyond what Mr. Sampson thought was necessary to kill him. In essence, the government must prove that Mr. Sampson intended to do more than kill [the deceased]. It must prove that he also intended to abuse his body above and beyond what was necessary to kill him. Serious physical abuse can be inflicted either before or after death. The victim does not have to be alive at the time the serious physical abuse is inflicted.
[/FONT]