When protected groups collide - woman walks away scot free from attempted cop murder

D

DoomAndDarkness**

Banned
Banned
Joined
Apr 22, 2014
Messages
1,400
Reaction score
0
So, yeah, you can cut a cop's throat and walk if you're a woman now. So there's that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0GkdUBIQoq0

A Vermont woman was found not guilty of attempted murder. That's despite a security camera capturing her sneaking up behind a Rutland police officer with a knife.

David Soucy, the jury foreman and the rest of the jury in this case came to almost an immediate decision that Jennifer Berube was not guilty. He says there were two key pieces of evidence that convinced them the charges did not fit the crime.

Many who saw the video from December 2012 of 40-year-old Jennifer Berube approaching Rutland City police officer Damon Nguyen from behind with a knife were surprised that the Vermont woman walked free after a trial ended just under two weeks ago.

"The scene is horrific I mean, she has a knife, she sneaks up behind him, there's a big you know, fight for the knife," said Soucy.

But Soucy says the charge of attempted second degree murder that prosecutors brought, didn't fit.

http://www.wcax.com/story/25743836/vt-jury-defends-decision-to-acquit-attempted-murder-suspect

Can anyone explain this? I mean what the fucking fuck?

Apparently, because she was 'just trying to get his keys to free her husband from jail' it's OK... Smh.
 
The story explains this pretty well.

The prosecution brought a charge that the evidence didn't fit. There was enough evidence for a lesser charge but they didn't charge with the lesser charge and then couldn't prove the heavier one. Sounds like the prosecutors messed up.
 
Sneeaking up behind someone with a knife and sticking it in their neck pretty clearly meets the definition of attempted murder imo.
 
^Not really. Pointing a gun at someone isn't attempted murder is it? She could have slashed him, could have stabbed him, then it would be attempted murder but she didn't did she
 
panamaican said:
The story explains this pretty well.

The prosecution brought a charge that the evidence didn't fit. There was enough evidence for a lesser charge but they didn't charge with the lesser charge and then couldn't prove the heavier one. Sounds like the prosecutors messed up.
Click to expand...

HAMSTER, HAMSTER, HAMSTER!

On topic: very interesting, I wonder what would've happened if it was a black man instead. Perhaps he'd get off scot free?
 
DoomAndDarkness said:
Sneeaking up behind someone with a knife and sticking it in their neck pretty clearly meets the definition of attempted murder imo.
Click to expand...

Well your opinion would be wrong.

Attempted murder requires the intent to actually kill someone. Simply threatening them is assault. So until you prove a desire to take a life, you only have assault.
 
panamaican said:
Well your opinion would be wrong.

Attempted murder requires the intent to actually kill someone. Simply threatening them is assault. So until you prove a desire to take a life, you only have assault.
Click to expand...

why wasn't it aggravated assault? cereal question.
 
TheBox said:
That's what I'd like to know. What exactly did the jury think she was doing when she put a knife to his throat and cut him? Giving him a shave?
Click to expand...

The jury doesnt makes accusations, they only decide on the charges put forward by the prosecutor.

I could disembowel a kid and hang him on a tree, but if the prosecutors come and charge me with possesion with intent to sell, and im not guilty of that then i walk free.

The prosecutors messed up, it has nothing to do with protected groups, usually prosecutors will throw any charge imaginable and then focus on the ones they can get you.

These guys got greedy and cocky due to the evidence and didnt do the correct paperwork.
 
What im curious though, does double jeopardy covers the act or the charges? can she be tried for assault or double jeopardy covers it?
 
Rod1 said:
What im curious though, does double jeopardy covers the act or the charges? can she be tried for assault or double jeopardy covers it?
Click to expand...

I think there needs to be enough new evidence to constitute a new trial. But I am judging that by Law and Order: SUV so you should probably wait for one of the lawyers to speak up.
 
"Juries gonna jury"

-OJ Simpson

dannyglover1118.jpg
 
Rod1 said:
The jury doesnt makes accusations, they only decide on the charges put forward by the prosecutor.

I could disembowel a kid and hang him on a tree, but if the prosecutors come and charge me with possesion with intent to sell, and im not guilty of that then i walk free.

The prosecutors messed up, it has nothing to do with protected groups, usually prosecutors will throw any charge imaginable and then focus on the ones they can get you.

These guys got greedy and cocky due to the evidence and didnt do the correct paperwork.
Click to expand...

No. There was also an aggravated assault charge. The jury found her not guilty of that too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,263,358
Messages
57,223,689
Members
175,589
Latest member
Macedonac Bogdan

Share this page

Back
Top