Police shoot 15yo & his 16yo accomplice gets charged for his murder
bornkiller
AdministratorIn your girlfriends snatch
Interesting law. 
Brandon Ross Charged With Murder After Police Fatally Shoot 15-Year-Old Companion
A 16-year-old boy has been charged with murder after a Chicago police officer fatally shot his 15-year-old friend Wednesday on the South Side.
Brandon Ross and his friend Tatioun Williams allegedly robbed a man at gunpoint in the 7000 block of South Cregier Avenue Wednesday evening, and were confronted by police officers a short time later, the Chicago Tribune reports.
When the officers told the teens to stop, Williams, who was holding the gun, allegedly turned in the officer's direction, Fox Chicago reports. Fearing for her life, the officer shot the 15-year-old, killing him.
"They could have taken him to jail, they could have done anything but taken his life," Williams' mother told the Tribune Thursday.
Under state law, police can charge someone with murder when an accomplice is killed during the commission of a crime. Even though Ross didn't pull the trigger, he was charged as an adult with murder and armed robbery. He was ordered held on $900,000 bail Friday.
The teens allegedly took a wallet and iPod from a 27-year-old man before the shooting.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/27/brandon-ross-charged-with_n_868289.html
Comments
If you are in collusion with another whilst commiting crime, you can be charged with anything they do and vice versa, up until such point in time that courts recognise gangs as LLP's...
Which will never happen.
Huh? But the cop shot and killed the kid and the kids accomplice got charged for his mates death.
Nobody else was killed, unless I'm missing something of course.
If he made no attempt to stop his friend pointing a gun at the police then in my eyes he should go down.
And the person(s) commiting the felony being the one responsible.
Kind off like how getaway drivers can get charged with murder when someone gets shot during a bank robbery, even if they are a block away when it happens.
They knew the felony would be comitted and are therefore responsible for any harm to others during the robbery.
Thats how i have understood it atleast, but im far from an expert in US law so...
Thats exactly it. If the 16 year old had not been with the 15 YO commiting crime, it can be assumed the 15YO would not have got into the situation that resulted in him being dead.
It could also be put that, depending on local ages of responsability, that the 16YO owed aduty of care to the 15YO and due to his criminal negligence - commiting a crime involving a firearm and letting the younger party have the weapon.
It could spin out so many ways.
The bottom line is if they had not decided to go robbing people at gun point, one of them would not be dead and the other would not be charged with murder. What did he think would happen if he pointed a gun at an armed police officer?
Dumbass one lifts gun
Pig one fatally shoots dumbass one
Dumbass 2 is like 'WTF?'
Pig 2 is like 'lolololol'
Judge sentences dumbass 2 for more or less pulling the trigger.
Dumbass 2 is like 'WTF?'
Both pigs are like 'lolololol'
The bold part is the part I don't really understand.
i can understand the pig shooting him since her stupid, pathetic, meaningless life may have been at risk, but if her fingers on the trigger.....Well...you know the rest?
Yes, the two of them committed a crime in robbing that guy.
But they were not in commission of a crime when Williams was shot. Williams was the only one allegedly in commission of a crime at that point in time, which would have been presumably to either attempt to kill a police officer or resist arrest.
Bullshit charge is bullshit, but the kid will go down for murder anyway because he's going to end up with a shitty public defender who will tell him to plead guilty.
I think you will find they were both resisting arrest.
I didn't read that.
I read that they were confronted after the robbery, and that officers approached them from behind and told them to stop, at which time Williams stopped and turned around.
If they both stopped, it means they were complying with the cops, and that they were no longer (Assuming they were being pursued in the first place, and not simply approached from behind whilst walking) committing that crime that second. If only one of them stopped, then only the one who did not stop would be in commission of that crime at the time the other was shot and killed.
Either way, I don't see the two of them committing a crime together at the time that Williams was killed.
Honestly, I think it should be dismissed as the police officer killed the kid, and for the right reason. The kid should get charged for Robbery still, but not murder.
Two kids tried robbing a walgreens with shotguns. Random dude in line pulled a .45, killed one and tackled the other who was trying to run. The surviving kid got charged with murder under the premise that he was directly involved with a dangerous crime and thus directly involved with his accomplice's death. The random guy didn't get charged with anything (surprisingly, given that he had a felony and wasn't legally carrying concealed).