Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 28

Thread: McLean guilty of lesser charge

  1. #11

    Default "dick" joke

    What kind of country do we live in where someone can shoot someone else in the face and not go to jail?
    Time heals the wound, but then there's still a scar -- to remind us of the way it's meant to be.

  2. #12
    Senior Member rikki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    a million miles away
    Posts
    6,586

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jumblemind View Post
    What kind of country do we live in where someone can shoot someone else in the face and not go to jail?
    A country that allows its citizens to be judged by a jury of their peers.
    Hearing voices inside my head in Burma-Shaving rhymes

  3. #13

    Default

    i did not watch this on court TV, only kept up with it in the KNS, which, i think does a good job of reporting court cases....based on all that i think the jury made a fair decision.

  4. #14
    Senior Member Boris's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Lower Hill Avenue
    Posts
    1,631

    Default

    McLean took a loaded rifle to confront an unarmed teenager. He pointed the gun at the boy. The boy wound up dead. McLean deserves jail time. The verdict may be consistent with our laws. If so, there's a problem with our laws.

  5. #15
    Senior Member Johnny Ringo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    North Vestal
    Posts
    4,357
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Boris View Post
    McLean took a loaded rifle to confront an unarmed teenager. He pointed the gun at the boy. The boy wound up dead. McLean deserves jail time. The verdict may be consistent with our laws. If so, there's a problem with our laws.
    There's not a problem with the law. McLean was charged with first degree murder, which includes "lesser included offenses", including the offense McLean was actually convicted of. When I heard the verdict I thought "jury nullification verdict." I think this is a classic example of that phenomenon.

    Think about this - if there weren't "lesser included offenses" the jury could have agreed on, McLean would probably have walked, unconvicted of anything.

  6. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    near downtown knoxville
    Posts
    5,013

    Default

    I have spoken with Erin McLean at some length since the murder, and suffice it to say that the situation was even more complex than it seems.

    While no one can deny that having your spouse cheat on you - and rub your face in it - is humiliating and horrible and one of the most painful things anyone can endure, many people face those feelings every day without pulling a gun on anyone. And when you are a parent to young children, and your spouse is cheating on you and humiliating you, your first thought needs to be how you can handle the feelings this causes you, and how you can best resolve the situation without permanently damaging your children. Pulling a gun on the third party is never going to help you achieve that. Instead, you risk depriving your children of your parenting forever.

    Additionally, many of the actions and statements ascribed to the murder victim during the trial (example: "in two weeks they will be calling me daddy.") are things we can never know were actually said or done. Because the person alleged to have done and said them is dead from a gun blast to the head.

    The whole thing is tragic. Bad decisions all around. But I do not believe that just because someone is rude to you or humiliates or insults you - or even if someone sleeps with your wife - gives you the right to kill them.

    I agree that the defense lawyering was pretty brilliant from a tactical point of view. But I doubt that Sean Powell's parents found it "brilliant" at all.

    The whole thing really makes me ill.

  7. #17
    Senior Member Boris's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Lower Hill Avenue
    Posts
    1,631

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Johnny Ringo View Post
    There's not a problem with the law. McLean was charged with first degree murder, which includes "lesser included offenses", including the offense McLean was actually convicted of. When I heard the verdict I thought "jury nullification verdict." I think this is a classic example of that phenomenon.

    Think about this - if there weren't "lesser included offenses" the jury could have agreed on, McLean would probably have walked, unconvicted of anything.
    I don't think you should be able to get off with probation only for an offense involving a loaded weapon used against another person.

  8. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Knoxville TN
    Posts
    3,474

    Default

    Well, we don't know yet that he won't get jail time. Sentencing is where that comes in. Yes, parole is a possibility but it's not the absolute.

    But I do have to agree w/ binR that it was three very unstable folks who got themselves in a bad situation.

    Bless those little boys. Hold them close in your prayers or up to the universe.

  9. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rikki View Post
    A country that allows its citizens to be judged by a jury of their peers.
    So you didn't get my dick joke? How about amended thusly:

    What kind of country do we live in where someone can shoot a person in the face with a hunting rifle and not go to jail?
    Time heals the wound, but then there's still a scar -- to remind us of the way it's meant to be.

  10. #20

    Default

    Also, the original incident happened two blocks over from my house, and I am joking to keep the awfulness at bay. Those kids do have their work cut out for them.
    Time heals the wound, but then there's still a scar -- to remind us of the way it's meant to be.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •