neonmania
|
posted on May 9, 2003 03:49:26 PM new
How do you get second degree murder when someone purchases a weapon under a false name. lies in wait, murders a man and then flees the country to avoid responsibility for his actions? These guys really annoy me - somehow they think that doctors should be given a death sentance for a legal procedure but they deserve nothing for committing the extact same act they personally try and convict their victims of.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
BUFFALO, N.Y. (May 9) - James Kopp, the anti-abortion sniper who gunned down an abortion doctor in his home five years ago, was sentenced Friday to the maximum sentence of 25 years to life in prison.
Kopp, 48, faced at least 15 years behind bars after being convicted of second-degree murder in the 1998 death of Dr. Barnett Slepian, 52, an obstetrician/gynecologist and father of four.
Kopp, who fled the country shortly after the shooting, was one of the FBI's most-wanted fugitives until his arrest in France in March 2001.
''It's clear the act is premeditated, there is no doubt about it,'' Erie County Court Judge Michael D'Amico told Kopp. ''You made an attempt to avoid responsibility for the act. What may appear righteous to you is immoral to someone else.''
The sentencing hearing was attended by members of abortion-rights organizations who had urged the judge to impose the maximum sentence.
''As a society we cannot allow people to take the law into their own hands in order to advance their own personal, political agendas,'' National Abortion Federation president Vicki Saporta said in a pre-sentencing letter.
Kopp, who still faces a federal trial, was convicted following an unusual one-day, non-jury trial. At Kopp's request, the judge was presented with a 35-page list of facts agreed to by both sides - including an admission by Kopp that he fired the shot that struck Slepian.
The defense argued that Kopp meant only to wound the doctor. But prosecutors countered that his choice of weapon - a Russian-made, scope-equipped assault rifle - and the use of aliases in buying it pointed to an intent to kill.
Kopp was lying in wait behind Slepian's suburban Amherst home Oct. 23, 1998, and fired once through a rear kitchen window after the doctor returned from a memorial service for his father. Slepian's wife and four sons were home at the time.
A suspect soon after the shooting, Kopp fled to Mexico and then Ireland before ending up in France. He is a suspect in the non-fatal shootings of four other abortion providers in Canada and Rochester between 1994 and 1997.
Kopp is charged in federal court with interfering with the right to an abortion. The charge carries a maximum life sentence. A scheduling conference in that case is set for May 14.
|
kraftdinner
|
posted on May 9, 2003 04:15:25 PM new
Maybe the defense presented it as a crime of passion because of the abortion issue. Either that or he plea bargained. Amazing!
|
bear1949
|
posted on May 9, 2003 04:24:44 PM new
It is called Coping a PLEA
|
neonmania
|
posted on May 9, 2003 04:59:39 PM new
SInce NY has the death penalty, if I was the DA and he wanted to cop a plea the only thing I would be willing to do is to take the death penalty off the table but no way would I drop to second degree.
|
msincognito
|
posted on May 9, 2003 05:38:34 PM new
No, no plea. Kopp was convicted after a one-day, non-jury trial. A grand jury made the decision to indict him for second-degree murder. I don't know why they went for that as opposed to first-degree murder. Personally, it sounds like first-degree to me but maybe since the penalty was the same, the prosecutor thought second-degree would be easier to prove.
(The penalty had to be the same because the death penalty was not an option in this case. France would not agree to extradite him unless the death penalty was taken off the table - a common requirement from countries that don't have the death penalty.)
more info: Visit Court TV's coverage of the case.
|
neonmania
|
posted on May 9, 2003 05:42:18 PM new
Ms - notice tht all three of the countries he fled to have that extradition requirement. Cowardice at it finest.
|
REAMOND
|
posted on May 10, 2003 02:15:23 PM new
It may also have to do with NY's first degree staute language. Some first degree statutes include intent to cause death OR intent to cause serious bodily injury that results in death. Others include the serious bodily injury within lesser offences.
Sometimes statutes will distinguish between stabbing someone in the heart with the intent to inflict injury and stabbing in the heart with intent to kill, even though the results are the same.
His previous "wounding" of four other doctors would be evidence of his intent not to kill.
|
neonmania
|
posted on May 10, 2003 02:28:51 PM new
Reamond - the only problem is, if you intend to cause injury but not death, you generally don't go for a torso shot. Assault rifle...lying in wait. All the other four attempts say to me is this guy was a bad shot ....
Maybe NYs overburdened criminal justice system did not need the media circus?
|
davebraun
|
posted on May 10, 2003 03:18:25 PM new
It had to do with International Treaty, he was apprehended in a country that by treaty would not extradite him to the United States if the prosecution sought the death penalty. It was agreed that the penalty would not be on the table, he was extradited and convicted of the crime. He received the maximum penalty allowable under both the law and the circumstances. He is also suspected of shooting three other doctors but has not been charged in those cases which are still open. He waived his right to a jury trial, plead quilty to the indictment and was sentanced by the judge.
|
neonmania
|
posted on May 10, 2003 03:46:42 PM new
Dave - I understand why deathe penalty was taken off the table but is there an explination of why second rather than first degree considering the obvious planning that went into the murder?
|
davebraun
|
posted on May 10, 2003 04:04:16 PM new
As I doubt he will ever see the light of day as a free man I don't think it really matters. My best guess is it saved resources by accepting his plea to the lesser charge. Further convictions for related crimes should be forth coming in federal court.
|
neonmania
|
posted on May 10, 2003 04:31:05 PM new
OK - but it doesn't look like he pld - he was indicted tried and convicted - the usually rules out a plea.
BTW - I don't really expect you to have the definative answer - it just strikes me as strange and bad precedence.
|
davebraun
|
posted on May 10, 2003 10:28:42 PM new
No, if you cop a plea it is considered a conviction. He gave up his right to a jury trial and instead the proceeding was decided by a judge. Basically he plead guilty with anexplanantion. The defense was that he only intended to wound the victim not to commit murder which his laweys still contend. One day of testimony was given to the judge to that end. The judge them past sentence after considering the matter. Bottom line is he got all they could give. In the past few years over 100 death row inmates have been cleared both by DNA evidence and clear evidence of police misconduct. For this reason I do not support the death penalty as it is to easy to make a mistake and once sentence is carried out it's a done deal. On the other hand some cases are very troubling.
|
reamond
|
posted on May 11, 2003 07:38:31 AM new
the only problem is, if you intend to cause injury but not death, you generally don't go for a torso shot
It is "serious" bodily injury, and the actual injury is not necessarily dispositive of the intent.Being a bad shot is akin to being a bad driver if the intent is not to kill.
A clearer example would be a fist fight wherein one participant is hit, then collapses and hits his head on the pavement and dies.
The case could go two ways. A lesser offense if their was no intent to kill. First degree if there was evidence of an intent to kill.
|
neonmania
|
posted on May 11, 2003 09:08:53 AM new
Reamond - how mny people do you know have that "punch to kill" ? On the otherhand, how many people aim a loaded assault rifle at a mans torso and fire because they just wanted to get his attention?
|
ebayauctionguy
|
posted on May 11, 2003 12:37:28 PM new
James Kopp, the anti-abortion sniper, should've gotten 5 years probation and some counseling instead of prison time. We all make mistakes. Though a person was killed, James Kopp is also a victim. He probably had an unpleasant childhood and so he shouldn't be held responsible for his actions. If James Kopp had received a better education, this crime probably would not have happened. With a little counseling and some community service, James Kopp should be able to safely return to society and become a law abiding citizen. Society should be blamed for this tragedy and it would be inhumane to lock up James Kopp in a prison cell. Two wrongs don't make a right! We need to build schools, not prisons! Free James Kopp!!
Just kidding. Kinda funny how liberals suddenly get tough on crime in a case like this.
|
kraftdinner
|
posted on May 11, 2003 12:43:14 PM new
That's good ebayauctionguy. 
|
neonmania
|
posted on May 11, 2003 01:10:12 PM new
Ahhh - see you have fallen into a common hole that often traps one when they choose to pidgeon hole people. You seem to think that because I have liberal views on some subjects, I have them on them all. In my very first post on these boards I mentioned that I might be somewhat difficult to cataorgize for this exact reason.....
I am not only a firm believer in being hard on crime, I avidly endorse the death penalty. Truth be known, the criminal sentance that annoys me the most is "Life without possibility of Parole". I just don't get it. If your actions have been deemed so heinous that it is decied that you should never live among the general public again, I see no reason whatsoever that those same people should be expected to give you meals and a roof over your head.
I think that death penalty cases should get ONE automatic appeal and one review 7 days prior to carrying out of sentence in front of a lottery picked board of five judges. Ability to commute sentences should be stripped from govenors in order to avoid atrocities such as the blanket commuting of sentences in Ohio based on personal beliefs or politics.
Cases involving DNA matches should have a 3 year deadline after sentencing.
Caes decided no Forensic evidence other than DNA should have a 5 year deadline.
Cases decided on circumstantial with no forensics, a 10 year deadline since yes, there is room for error and the window to discover possible mistake should be open.
[ edited by neonmania on May 11, 2003 01:11 PM ]
|
keiichem
|
posted on May 11, 2003 01:32:37 PM new
Neo
I didnt think you needed a crutch for your left side. 
[ edited by keiichem on May 11, 2003 01:54 PM ]
|
neonmania
|
posted on May 11, 2003 01:48:19 PM new
Kei - Of course I also think that the money saved by becoming stricter in these area should be redirected into computer labs, after school and tutoring programs in low income areas in order to keep kids off the street and provide them with more options.
I would rather use tax payer money to help reduce future crime rates than to throw it away on problems that cannot be solved.
|
kraftdinner
|
posted on May 11, 2003 02:59:19 PM new
Neon, maybe you can answer this semi-related question for me... When death penalties are carried out, they always talk about how many millions it costs to execute a person. What makes the process so expensive? Anyone know??
|
neonmania
|
posted on May 11, 2003 03:36:25 PM new
Krafty - most of these cases involve a public defender from the get go, even the ones that are able to afford their own lawyers are broke and end up with a public defender for their appeal which is automatic in a death penalty case. Once the apeal is denied in state court, you now move on to an appeal in federal court, all of the require a gret deal of reasearching to find the one aspect of the trial that can be used to over turn the case. During this time, every time one of these happens, you have another team on the prosecution side fighting everything. Basically the public gets to pay:
1) To prosecute them
2) To defend them
3) To house and them while all of this is going on.
If the appeals were limited to one nd deadlines were attached and adhered to, a lot of those costs would be eliminated.
Of course the most ridiculous charge currently being carried for a death row inmate is an Oregonian prisoner on death row who currently receives dialasis treatments three times a week at a cost of 120,000 a year . Of course he wants to save the prison system some money and instead have them foot the bill for a transplant (100k) so that they only have to pay for 12k a year in meds to keep him alive until they kill him. In the meantime - he wants a TV placed in the dialysis room.
[ edited by neonmania on May 11, 2003 03:51 PM ]
|
kraftdinner
|
posted on May 11, 2003 04:01:56 PM new
Neon, I don't know why I asked such a dumb question... of course that's why it costs so much. I must've had a mini-stroke when I was posting. 
That's appalling about the dialysis guy. That makes no sense to me. Have any prisoners actually received transplants that you know of?
|
neonmania
|
posted on May 11, 2003 05:13:23 PM new
I do seem to remember a case of a death row inmate in the midwest on the list for a transplant but I can't find any info on it so I don't think it has actually happaned yet.
Rationale is that prisoners are entitled to the same level of health care accessible to the average citizen.
The Oregon case will be interesting to watch because he is actually recieving a level of care now that budget cuts in their public health system may end up causing average citizens to be denied. The Oregon prison system installed a dialysis center in one of their medium secuirty prisons to cut down on transportation and security costs of taking prisoners to local hospitals for treatment. Ironically many of th e hospitals that were used are now being forced to eliminate their clinics due to state healthcare budget cuts. Oregon is now even setting up a criteria that will drop low income recipients to the bottom of the the list and in some cases keep them off entirely.
There was a big controversy in California a year or so ago when tax payers had tp foot a One Million dollar bill for a heart transplant and after care for an inmate serving a 14 year sentence.... He died one year later in December anyway.
|
