Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: xzins; Kolokotronis; jude24; Congressman Billybob; winstonchurchill
I do not agree that he could face negligent homicide charges.

If he dies and if Cheney is found to be negligent, then he would have to answer to the charge of negligent homicide. In his statement today he has as much as admitted to negligence. He says he didn't see him, but then when you have a gun in your hand that really isn't an excuse. He had a duty to ensure that when he pulled the trigger that there were no people in his sight. He breached that duty, hence he was obviously negligent. This is one of those "res ipsa loquitur" situations (the thing speaks for itself."

I doubt there would be a felony charge here since there was no reckless disregard for human life, but I don't see how Cheny can avoid a misdemeanor involuntary manslaughter charge. Any of us would have to face such a charge. Cheney should not be exempt.

That being said, this is a tempest in a teapot. Something akin to crashing your car because you were looking at your cell phone.

140 posted on 02/15/2006 5:10:49 PM PST by P-Marlowe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies ]


To: P-Marlowe
Former prosecutor here. The prosecution would have prove each element beyond a reasonable doubt. This case would go nowhere, might even result in a directed verdict of acquittal.

In any event a jury would only be 20 minutes before returning an acquittal. Ain't happening, jack.

143 posted on 02/15/2006 5:50:45 PM PST by JCEccles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 140 | View Replies ]

To: P-Marlowe; Thunder 6; Travis McGee; rdb3

It's the military thing in me and being peripherally involved in two friendly fire incidents on the battlefield. I remember in the Panama invasion when I was approached by a Ranger Chaplain. It was the first time I ever saw the guy in my life, and his first words to me were, "Your guys killed my guys." I didn't know what to say because it was the first I'd heard of it. As it turned out, it wasn't that simple. There was an investigation that revealed a dual responsibility. Their forward observer had marked their forward team back further than they actually were. Our guy began a gun run ahead of the line, but he wasn't supposed to run his guns to the target. He was supposed to direct aim and shoot the actual target. Their being out of place and his failure to follow directions for that mission caused the death of some Rangers.

There was mutual negligence, but there were no charges.

In another case, a young 82d troop got forward of his advancing team, and he took a friendly round in the spine.

One could call the shooter negligent, because he didn't identify his target, but the troop wasn't supposed to be there.


Similarly, Dick Cheney was part of a team hunt. Each team member has a responsibility...especially with a quick target like quail. They are not supposed to get ahead of the line of fire. I understand that this man did.

Quick reaction bird required quick reaction firing. Cheney fired and the man was hit BECAUSE he was where he wasn't where he was supposed to be. (I hear he was even in some brush at the time.)

I don't see how it's possible to call that negligence. Cheney did what was expected.

It was the other guy who was negligent, or it was a no-fault accident.


157 posted on 02/15/2006 7:33:54 PM PST by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 140 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson