Posted on 02/13/2009 12:33:15 PM PST by Free ThinkerNY
Rendered his wife speechless too. What a wonderful religion.
[slaps head] You’re sooo right! How could I not have recognized that? Allah was good to her!
Yea, I bet that's it. I should not have jumped to conclusions like this. I'm so sorry.
Exactly - the difference is premeditation.
Kind of hard to argue that you sawed someones head off without thought.
She was an attractive woman.
Sawing off a head is unlikely to be the cause of death. It is the moment of impetus that often defines the case for premeditation. Lawyers continue to try to use post-mortem activities to define premeditation, but it is a tough sell.
It’s not that he sawed off her head - it’s when he bought the saw (etc.) that may help to show premeditation.
Sad. Another death by protective order.
One of her relatives needs to torture and kill the POS husband.
I looked it up, and it’s as I thought. In NY, they changed the laws and murder in the first degree is some variation of killing a law enforcement official. What they call Second degree is what is normally called First degree:
Section 125.27 Murder in the first degree
A person is guilty of murder in the first degree when:
1. With intent to cause the death of another person, he causes the death of such person or of a third person; and
(a) Either:
(i) the intended victim was a police officer as defined in subdivision 34 of section 1.20 of the criminal procedure law who was at the time of the killing engaged in the course of performing his official duties, and the defendant knew or reasonably should have known that the intended victim was a police officer; or
(ii) the intended victim was a peace officer as defined in paragraph a of subdivision twenty-one, subdivision twenty-three, twenty-four or sixty-two (employees of the division for youth) of section 2.10 of the criminal procedure law who was at the time of the killing engaged in the course of performing his official duties, and the defendant knew or reasonably should have known that the intended victim was such a uniformed court officer, parole officer, probation officer, or employee of the division for youth; or
(iii) the intended victim was an employee of a state correctional institution or was an employee of a local correctional facility as defined in subdivision two of section forty of the correction law, who was at the time of the killing engaged in the course of performing his official duties, and the defendant knew or reasonably should have known that the intended victim was an employee of a state correctional institution or a local correctional facility; or
(iv) at the time of the commission of the killing, the defendant was confined in a state correctional institution or was otherwise in custody upon a sentence for the term of his natural life, or upon a sentence commuted to one of natural life, or upon a sentence for an indeterminate term the minimum of which was at least fifteen years and the maximum of which was natural life, or at the time of the commission of the killing, the defendant had escaped from such confinement or custody while serving such a sentence and had not yet been returned to such confinement or custody; or
(v) the intended victim was a witness to a crime committed on a prior occasion and the death was caused for the purpose of preventing the intended victim’s testimony in any criminal action or proceeding whether or not such action or proceeding had been commenced, or the intended victim had previously testified in a criminal action or proceeding and the killing was committed for the purpose of exacting retribution for such prior testimony, or the intended victim was an immediate family member of a witness to a crime committed on a prior occasion and the killing was committed for the purpose of preventing or influencing the testimony of such witness, or the intended victim was an immediate family member of a witness who had previously testified in a criminal action or proceeding and the killing was committed for the purpose of exacting retribution upon such witness for such prior testimony. As used in this subparagraph “immediate family member” means a husband, wife, father, mother, daughter, son, brother, sister, stepparent, grandparent, stepchild or grandchild; or
(vi) the defendant committed the killing or procured commission of the killing pursuant to an agreement with a person other than the intended victim to commit the same for the receipt, or in expectation of the receipt, of anything of pecuniary value from a party to the agreement or from a person other than the intended victim acting at the direction of a party to such agreement; or
(vii) the victim was killed while the defendant was in the course of committing or attempting to commit and in furtherance of robbery, burglary in the first degree or second degree, kidnapping in the first degree, arson in the first degree or second degree, rape in the first degree, criminal sexual act in the first degree, sexual abuse in the first degree, aggravated sexual abuse in the first degree or escape in the first degree, or in the course of and furtherance of immediate flight after committing or attempting to commit any such crime or in the course of and furtherance of immediate flight after attempting to commit the crime of murder in the second degree; provided however, the victim is not a participant in one of the aforementioned crimes and, provided further that, unless the defendant’s criminal liability under this subparagraph is based upon the defendant having commanded another person to cause the death of the victim or intended victim pursuant to section 20.00 of this chapter, this subparagraph shall not apply where the defendant’s criminal liability is based upon the conduct of another pursuant to section 20.00 of this chapter; or
(viii) as part of the same criminal transaction, the defendant, with intent to cause serious physical injury to or the death of an additional person or persons, causes the death of an additional person or persons; provided, however, the victim is not a participant in the criminal transaction; or
(ix) prior to committing the killing, the defendant had been convicted of murder as defined in this section or section 125.25 of this article, or had been convicted in another jurisdiction of an offense which, if committed in this state, would constitute a violation of either of such sections; or
(x) the defendant acted in an especially cruel and wanton manner pursuant to a course of conduct intended to inflict and inflicting torture upon the victim prior to the victim’s death. As used in this subparagraph, “torture” means the intentional and depraved infliction of extreme physical pain; “depraved” means the defendant relished the infliction of extreme physical pain upon the victim evidencing debasement or perversion or that the defendant evidenced a sense of pleasure in the infliction of extreme physical pain; or
(xi) the defendant intentionally caused the death of two or more additional persons within the state in separate criminal transactions within a period of twenty-four months when committed in a similar fashion or pursuant to a common scheme or plan; or
(xii) the intended victim was a judge as defined in subdivision twenty-three of section 1.20 of the criminal procedure law and the defendant killed such victim because such victim was, at the time of the killing, a judge; or
(xiii) the victim was killed in furtherance of an act of terrorism, as defined in paragraph (b) of subdivision one of section 490.05 of this chapter; and
(b) The defendant was more than eighteen years old at the time of the commission of the crime.
This incredible! My uncle used to live in Orchard Park. It’s a peaceful burg, with beautiful scenery, and what used to be a gorgeous family park which has been taken over by the low lifes, drugs, etc.
All day long, our local news station has talked about nothing but the plane crash which took 49 lives, even to dropping Rush to keep saying the same things over and over.
This is NOT my country any more. God help us.
LOL, ok. What a pain in the neck the law is.
How's that workin' out for ya, Muzzie?
Obviously, this is the worst form of domestic violence possible," Erie County District Attorney Frank A. Sedita III said today.
LMAO!
No sh!t! Ya think?
I’m sure the beheading was accidental.
Some knives are just totally unpredictable. He was probably just waving it around, and next thing you know, his wife is missing her head.
/sarc
NY is further down the drain than I thought. I need to sell my house and land up there, before it becomes worthless.
A "culturally sensitive" charge?
Actually:
second degree murder n. a non-premeditated killing, resulting from an assault in which death of the victim was a distinct possibility. Second degree murder is different from First Degree Murder which is a premeditated, intentional killing, or results from a vicious crime such as arson, rape, or armed robbery. Exact distinctions on degree vary by state.
He cut off her head, but he didn't mean to do it? Riight.
Muzzammil Hassan is the founder and chief executive officer of Bridges TV, which he launched in 2004, amid hopes that it would help portray Muslims in a more positive light.
Guess that didn't work out so well.
LOL.
I was thinking that as well. You really CAN’T make this stuff up. Of course, all these warm-fuzzy liberals want us to believe that the Muslims are just like us.... I realize not all Muslims would do such things but when you’re worldview comes from a large black square box and a man who was talking with voices in a cave, what can we expect.
Of course, I am being taught in a college course right now that millions converted to Islam because of its committment to families. Yikes!!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.