By Suzanne Riley
1. The felony murder rule- what is it?
In the United States, the felony murder rule is a legal doctrine that allows for a person to be charged with murder even if they did not kill anyone. This rule has been a part of the American justice system for centuries, but it has come under fire in recent years as critics argue that it is unfair and unjust.
The felony murder rule has been used to convict people who are not murderers, such as robbery victims who were killed by the police during a robbery, and people who were involved in a crime where someone was killed, even if they did not kill anyone themselves.
Critics of the rule argue that it is outdated and needs to be reformed or abolished altogether. If you are interested in learning more about the felony murder rule and the debate surrounding it, then keep reading!
2. How the rule is interpreted and used by police and prosecutors
The felony murder rule is interpreted and used very differently by police and prosecutors. Police may utilize it to charge a suspect with murder in a situation where the death of a person was not intended or caused by the suspect themselves. Prosecutors may use the rule to charge all individuals involved in a crime with murder in a situation where someone was killed, regardless of their role in the killing.
The felony murder rule has been particularly criticized in cases where a suspect was involved in a crime yet was not directly responsible for the death of another person. Despite the controversy, the felony murder rule remains a powerful tool in the hands of prosecutors and police officers to hold potentially guilty parties accountable for the death of another.
3. The rule’s history in the United States
The felony murder rule has been part of criminal law for centuries, and its roots can be traced back to English common law. This rule was adopted in the United States through the English common law, and to this day, the felony murder rule remains a foundational part of criminal law throughout the country.
In the United States, the use of the felony murder rule varied from state to state. The application of the rule has been long debated and increasingly scrutinized as the decades passed. In recent years, many states have begun to modify the severity of the felony murder rule or eliminate it altogether. This has allowed states to be more flexible in the types of cases they can pursue, as well as provide relief to individuals who may not have been held accountable under the rule.
4. Cases of people who have been wrongfully convicted or sentenced under the rule
In the American justice system, the felony murder rule can lead to wrongful convictions and unjust sentences, especially when the accused person is only vaguely linked to the actual crime.
An example is the case of Julius Jones, an African-American man who served more than 20 years on death row in Oklahoma, convicted under the felony murder rule. Jones was accused of killing a man named Paul Howell in 1999, and was convicted based on “participation in a felony offense”. He was the only suspect who was in the car of the man accused of committing the murder and was subsequently linked to the killing, even though there was no physical evidence linking him to the crime.
In 2020, Julius Jones was finally granted clemency after two decades in prison, and the case was a stark reminder of the devastating effects of wrongful convictions due to the felony murder rule. Another example is the case of Michael Lindsey, who was wrongfully convicted of felony murder in 2008. After his conviction was overturned and he was released from prison, Lindsey was awarded $725,000 in compensation for his wrongful conviction.
LaKeith Smith, 15 at the time, was among five juveniles from Montgomery implicated in two housebreaks during a weekday. During apprehending of the group by a Millbrook officer, 16-year old A’Donte Washington sustained deadly gunshot wounds, and was declared dead at the scene. While an initial 25-year sentence offered in plea bargain was declined by Smith who chose to go on trial instead; he eventually received 55 years after conviction but later saw it reduced to 30 years. Three other co-defendants eventually entered guilty pleas. Two 16 years olds were given 17 year sentences but only served 14 months. The 18 year old was sentenced to 27 years in prison.
In another incident in Missouri, at around 1:30 am on January 1, 2009, involving 5 adults fighting at a New Year’s Eve party led to one death and another suffering critical injuries – while 2 of the participants were 18 they pled guilty to 2nd degree murder receiving 24 years imprisonment. One of them shaved 6 years from his sentence to testify against David Johnson. However, David Johnson being 15 years old at the time, merely being present entrapped him under felony murder rule even though he had no active participation in the altercation. David, like LaKeith, was sentenced to more time than his co-defendants by the devastating blow of being sentenced to 25 years for having not killed anyone.
These cases and many more demonstrate the shocking reality of the felony murder rule in America and the devastating consequences it can have for individuals, who have been wrongfully accused and convicted or sentence under the rule.
5. How the rule affects victims’ families
The felony murder rule has far-reaching effects that go beyond the victim or perpetrator of the crime. It can have deep and lasting effects on victims and their families as well.
The emotional and psychological impact of being falsely convicted or sentenced under the rule is profound. The wrongfully convicted individual is facing not only prison time, but the reality that their life is essentially on hold, and they are no longer able to enjoy all the activities that they use to on the outside.
The families of those wrongfully accused and convicted under the rule also face an immense amount of pain and hardship, often struggling to make ends meet due to loss of income and an emotional burden of guilt and helplessness. They must endure the physical and emotional trauma of their loved one being wrongfully convicted and may have to divert their time and resources into fighting for their cause.
The felony murder rule has far-reaching ramifications that go beyond the perpetrator of the crime and its effects can be seen in both its victims and their families. While efforts are being made to reduce the prevalence of wrongful convictions due to the rule, it is clear that more needs to be done to ensure justice is served.
6. The arguments for and against the rule
The felony murder rule has been the source of much controversy amongst legal scholars, victims’ families, and criminal justice activists. While the rule has been implemented in some form in half of the states in the US and in many countries around the world, its legal validity has been long debated.
Proponents of the rule argue that it is necessary to prevent perpetrators of criminal activity from taking advantage of a loophole. They argue that criminals should not be able to escape liability for their actions by not pulling the trigger or using force when a death took place due to their actions.
Opponents of the rule argue that it does not take into account the degree of culpability exhibited by the accused, and it is unfair to individuals who were strictly present or involved in some minor way. They assert that in most cases, the accused was not intent on criminal activity and should only be charged with the minimum degree of culpability.
The debate between proponents and opponents of the felony murder rule has been going on for years, with neither side convincing the other to switch views. It is clear that the issue is complex, and each situation should be carefully analyzed on a case-by-case basis.
7. What needs to be done to reform the rule?
Reforming the felony murder rule is a complex task that involves a multifaceted approach. Here are five steps that should be taken:
1. Ensure that victims’ families are given a platform to have their stories heard. This should include a focus on those who have been wrongly convicted due to the felony murder rule.
2. Support and strengthen restorative justice methods. This means that those who are unfairly convicted should be allowed to challenge their convictions.
3. Remove or reform mandatory minimum sentences for crimes related to the felony murder rule. This includes reducing punishments for underlings who were present or involved in some minor way.
4. Strengthen legal counsels for those affected by the felony murder rule. This includes adding social workers with experience in criminal justice to the advocacy team.
5. Push for the adoption of more lenient forms of the felony murder rule. This includes taking into consideration the intent of the accused and the manner that they were involved.
Finally, it is important to note that no single approach to reforming the felony murder rule will fix the issue. It is up to us as a society to make sure that the innocent are not punished and that those who are guilty are held accountable for their actions. It is also up to us to ensure that restorative justice measures are properly implemented so that those wrongfully imprisoned have the chance to prove their innocence.