Pot grower faces murder charges for firefighter

[Guest MikeSC]

Am I not responsible for those deaths?

 

No. The act of hunting isn't illegal. If you were trying to shoot at some guy and missed and caused a fatal fire, then you would be responsible.

We'll have to disagree here. If my actions, even UNINTENTIONAL, cause deaths --- there is a problem.

-=Mike

[Guest Nanks]

Trying the guy for MURDER is silly, but the fact of the matter is... he was growing an illegal substance, which in turn caused a fire that killed two human beings. Growing an illegal substance does NOT equate to cooking a fucking hamburger.

What if he was cooking a hamburger because he had the munchies from smoking his illegal homegrown weed?? That's a fire born of illegal activities.

 

Or more specifically, if he dropped his joint on the carpet and the house went up then a firefighter died putting it out.

 

Moreover, surely the manufacturers of the faulty wiring are partially to blame in all this. If those were heat lamps being used to incubate an egg or something and this happened that company would be in all-sorts.

[Guest MikeSC]

Trying the guy for MURDER is silly, but the fact of the matter is... he was growing an illegal substance, which in turn caused a fire that killed two human beings. Growing an illegal substance does NOT equate to cooking a fucking hamburger.

What if he was cooking a hamburger because he had the munchies from smoking his illegal homegrown weed?? That's a fire born of illegal activities.

 

Or more specifically, if he dropped his joint on the carpet and the house went up then a firefighter died putting it out.

 

Moreover, surely the manufacturers of the faulty wiring are partially to blame in all this. If those were heat lamps being used to incubate an egg or something and this happened that company would be in all-sorts.

Case 1) Cooking burgers, no matter the reason, is very much legal.

Case 2) They'd be unable to prove anything, as the odds of the pot actually still existing to any degree while being at the center of a blaze is virtually nil.

Case 3) If you can prove it, good luck. Keep in mind that wiring goes through rather stringent testing and a great deal of "wiring" problems is caused by negligence on the part of the user.

-=Mike

[NoCalMike 0]

Dammit MikeSC, that last sig pic of yours is actually legit funny, but take the other one out, yer sig is too f'n big now......

[Jobber of the Week 0]

Again, the lights were set up to violate the law, whether we like it or not.

I can lights in my house because I like lights.

 

I can have lights and marijuana in my house and the lights are still legal, the marijuana is not.

 

I think we'll just have to disagree on this point.

 

If something bad happens DUE to a violation of law, there is a problem for you.

 

I'm trying to say what the violation is. Faulty wiring. AND, in a seperate charge, posession. When you're posessing the drugs, that's illegal. That doesn't make the lights any less legal if you're doing everything properly.

 

You still don't seem to understand that this is being done to make an example out of this guy, certainly with a murder charge instead of manslaughter that's pretty obvious. A murder should mean he intentionally started a fire so that a firefighter would die.

 

My opinion is that someone thought it was unfair that the firefighters died for this guy's pot and brought these ludicrous charges against him to send a "DON'T GROW POT" message to the populace. I just don't see why they don't investigate the wiring to use that against him. That certainly makes more sense and isn't stretching the intent of law.

 

Let's say I'm hunting (no, I don't hunt).

 

Let's say while hunting, I miss a shot and accidentally set fire to some dry foliage on the ground. This becomes a forest fire that burns down peoples' houses and kills a few.

 

Am I not responsible for those deaths? Even though, THEORETICALLY, a forest fire could have occurred at any point?

 

If you're hunting in a zone designated for hunting, your only doing what was expected in that area and the fire happened due to a situation beyond your control.

 

Which is, again, different here. Because this was, I'd 90% be sure, not beyond this guy's control. I just think it's vitally important in the legal system that the charges be accurate. You don't arrest a guy for a nonviolent robbery and charge him with murder and business fraud.

[Vyce 0]

If it's criminal negligence from an illegal act then there should be manslaughter charges,

That's what I SAID - it's really an issue of jurisdictional semantics. Third-Degree murder IS pretty much manslaughter, just by a different name.

 

but I wonder how rare something like this case is, and if it sets a precedent will it be strictly limited already illegal activities (pot growing) or something that is not legal, but is still negligent (overloading power recepticles)?

 

It would probably depend on a case-by-case basis, due to the different facts of the different cases. In your hypo, it would depend, I suppose, on whether there was a law in that jurisdiction making it illegal to overload power recepticles.

 

What if he was cooking a hamburger because he had the munchies from smoking his illegal homegrown weed?? That's a fire born of illegal activities.

 

Or more specifically, if he dropped his joint on the carpet and the house went up then a firefighter died putting it out.

 

Your hamburge example: wouldn't work that way.

 

Your joint example: this might trigger it, since the smoking of the joint is an actual illegal act. Cooking a hamburger isn't. Mike's right, though, you wouldn't have any evidence that this was the case (unless the individual being charged admitted to police they caused the fire with a joint).

 

Moreover, surely the manufacturers of the faulty wiring are partially to blame in all this. If those were heat lamps being used to incubate an egg or something and this happened that company would be in all-sorts.

 

They may be liable in civil court, but not on criminal charges - unless they specifically knew that their products had faulty wiring, which had previously resulted in fires / deaths, and took no reasonable steps to prevent any future fires / deaths (by issuing, for example, a product recall, etc.).

 

My opinion is that someone thought it was unfair that the firefighters died for this guy's pot and brought these ludicrous charges against him to send a "DON'T GROW POT" message to the populace.

 

This is really a problem?

 

This type of thing is 10 times more productive than any stupid "______ is my anti-drug!" or "If you do drugs, you support terrorism!" commercial ever could be.

 

It's all moot, anyway, since all of these charges are just being made for leverage in plea negotiations. This'll probably be plead down to simple possession charges, and this schmuck probably won't see much, if any, jail time, though their actions have caused the death of a few individuals.