Dagonee or other legal minds, perhaps you could explain it to me. Is being charged with kidnapping resulting in death more serious than pre-meditated murder? Is it because it's a federal crime as opposed to a state crime? Posts: 2069 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
The penalties must be similar to murder though, since it said at the end of the article that if convicted, she'll face the death penalty or life imprisonment. Justly so, IMO.
Posts: 5948 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
A premeditated murder isn't a federal crime unless it occurs on a federal reservation/property or the victim is transported across state lines or to federal officers in the performance of their duty or to elected federal officials.
Even if one of those conditions is met, a simple murder by itself isn't sufficient to invoke a death penalty trial. However, kidnapping resulting in death is one of the federal death penalty offenses.
There are three bases of jurisdiction for federal crime. If one of these aren't present, then no federal prosectution is possible:
Exclusive: Sovereign jurisdiction over federal territories and enclaves such as military bases, Indian reservations, or post offices. The method by which the federal government acquired control of the land can affect whether federal jurisdiction applies. In these situations, if there were no federal criminal law then there could be no prosecution at all. There are a variety of federal laws that apply in such situations, such as the muder statute mentioned by aspectre. The Assimilative Crimes Act allows federal prosecution of any state crime that would apply if the federal enclave was not present and is not punishable by an act of Congress.
Direct: Deals with issues that touch a direct federal interest, such as interference with activities of federal government, immigration, or assassination of a president. The same federal murder law that provides jurisdiction on federal enclaves provides jurisdiction over murder which interferes w/ federal activities. Oswald was charged with a state crime because no federal crime existed at the time that would cover shooting the president.
Auxiliary: Also called supplementary or duplicative. This is federal crime that directly "competes" with state crime law. The first type is duplicative, such as federal gun and drug laws, which are typically passed so Congress looks like it's responding to an issue. For example, the death penalty statute for car jacking deaths was passed in response to a particular incident in a state without the death penalty. Another type is ational crime, such as RICO, interstate extortion, and money laundering, where the investigation must cross state lines. Finally, there's local corruption, where the local government has a conflict of interest with enforcing its own laws. Obvious examples include county political machines and civil rights violations. For these types of federal crimes, a "jurisdictional hook" must be found. Usually this is the commerce clause, but other areas of the Constitution are used as well. This jurisdictional hook is an element of the crime and must be found beyond a reasonable doubt by the jury. For example, the Hobbes act prohibits robbery and extortion that interferes with interstate commerce. The prosectution must present evidence how commerce was affected and the jury must be instructed to find it.
Obviously, state law could have handled this case. But the federal government gets first crack at it if they want it.
As a side note, double jeopardy does not prevent the state from trying the accused again, whether she's convicted in federal court or not.
posted
I know that during the civil rights era, people who murdered civil rights workers were charged with the federal crime of violating their civil rights, since the states were often refusing to prosecute at all, or to charge them with murder.
Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
