Clinton drug deal leaves man dead; three arrested.

The Best online firearms community in Louisiana.

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • oleheat

    Professional Amateur
    Premium Member
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    May 18, 2009
    13,775
    38
    I know the deal about the CC in someones home my question was what does this have to do with him. He doesn't have a CHP. I didn't understand the case law deal.


    I think I read somewhere there's a recent amendment to the law that says if you are under 21 carrying concealed to a drug deal, BY LAW you must inform the home owner, person leasing the home, or the drug dealer in charge that you are carrying concealed before entering the home....
     

    D-DAY

    The Bronx Bull
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Sep 16, 2006
    468
    16
    Hammond
    The key element in first degree murder is "specific intent". What makes you believe Manzella entered that home with specific intent?

    +1 There was an act and a reaction.

    I don't see Murder 1 sticking.

    Then again I don't get paid to know criminal law.
     

    dzelenka

    D.R. 1827; HM; P100x3
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Mar 2, 2008
    4,013
    36
    Covington
    When he fired the gun, would a reasonable man believe that he had specific intent to kill or cause great bodily harm? If you shoot someone on purpose, you have specific intent. The act is shooting. What did you intend when you shot?
     

    charlie12

    Not a Fed.
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Apr 21, 2008
    8,537
    63
    Pride
    +1 There was an act and a reaction.

    I don't see Murder 1 sticking.

    Then again I don't get paid to know criminal law.

    I think the only thing different between Murder 1 and Murder 2 is in Murder 1 they might stick you in the arm and in Murder 2 someone will stick you somewhere else for the rest of your life.
     

    Baldrik78

    Misanthrope Savant
    Rating - 100%
    13   0   0
    Jul 7, 2009
    2,302
    38
    Baton Rouge, LA
    +1 to narco for quoting a 30 page thread on another forum.

    +1000 to ilikeporkchops @ arf.com for quoting the entire 30 page thread again. 10 posts down.

    Who says the art of douche-baggery is dead?:rofl:
     

    charlie12

    Not a Fed.
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Apr 21, 2008
    8,537
    63
    Pride
    RS 14:30



    §30. First degree murder

    A. First degree murder is the killing of a human being:

    (1) When the offender has specific intent to kill or to inflict great bodily harm and is engaged in the perpetration or attempted perpetration of aggravated kidnapping, second degree kidnapping, aggravated escape, aggravated arson, aggravated rape, forcible rape, aggravated burglary, armed robbery, assault by drive-by shooting, first degree robbery, second degree robbery, simple robbery, terrorism, cruelty to juveniles, or second degree cruelty to juveniles.

    (2) When the offender has a specific intent to kill or to inflict great bodily harm upon a fireman, peace officer, or civilian employee of the Louisiana State Police Crime Laboratory or any other forensic laboratory engaged in the performance of his lawful duties, or when the specific intent to kill or to inflict great bodily harm is directly related to the victim's status as a fireman, peace officer, or civilian employee.

    (3) When the offender has a specific intent to kill or to inflict great bodily harm upon more than one person.

    (4) When the offender has specific intent to kill or inflict great bodily harm and has offered, has been offered, has given, or has received anything of value for the killing.

    (5) When the offender has the specific intent to kill or to inflict great bodily harm upon a victim who is under the age of twelve or sixty-five years of age or older.

    (6) When the offender has the specific intent to kill or to inflict great bodily harm while engaged in the distribution, exchange, sale, or purchase, or any attempt thereof, of a controlled dangerous substance listed in Schedules I, II, III, IV, or V of the Uniform Controlled Dangerous Substances Law.

    (7) When the offender has specific intent to kill or to inflict great bodily harm and is engaged in the activities prohibited by R.S. 14:107.1(C)(1).

    (8) When the offender has specific intent to kill or to inflict great bodily harm and there has been issued by a judge or magistrate any lawful order prohibiting contact between the offender and the victim in response to threats of physical violence or harm which was served on the offender and is in effect at the time of the homicide.

    (9) When the offender has specific intent to kill or to inflict great bodily harm upon a victim who was a witness to a crime or was a member of the immediate family of a witness to a crime committed on a prior occasion and:

    (a) The killing was committed for the purpose of preventing or influencing the victim's testimony in any criminal action or proceeding whether or not such action or proceeding had been commenced; or

    (b) The killing was committed for the purpose of exacting retribution for the victim's prior testimony.

    B.(1) For the purposes of Paragraph (A)(2) of this Section, the term "peace officer" means any peace officer, as defined in R.S. 40:2402, and includes any constable, marshal, deputy marshal, sheriff, deputy sheriff, local or state policeman, commissioned wildlife enforcement agent, federal law enforcement officer, jail or prison guard, parole officer, probation officer, judge, attorney general, assistant attorney general, attorney general's investigator, district attorney, assistant district attorney, or district attorney's investigator.

    (2) For the purposes of Paragraph (A)(9) of this Section, the term "member of the immediate family" means a husband, wife, father, mother, daughter, son, brother, sister, stepparent, grandparent, stepchild, or grandchild.

    (3) For the purposes of Paragraph (A)(9) of this Section, the term "witness" means any person who has testified or is expected to testify for the prosecution, or who, by reason of having relevant information, is subject to call or likely to be called as a witness for the prosecution, whether or not any action or proceeding has yet commenced.

    C. Penalty provisions.

    (1) If the district attorney seeks a capital verdict, the offender shall be punished by death or life imprisonment at hard labor without benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence, in accordance with the determination of the jury. The provisions of C.Cr.P. Art 782 relative to cases in which punishment may be capital shall apply.

    (2) If the district attorney does not seek a capital verdict, the offender shall be punished by life imprisonment at hard labor without benefit of parole, probation or suspension of sentence. The provisions of C.Cr.P. Art 782 relative to cases in which punishment is necessarily confinement at hard labor shall apply.

    Amended by Acts 1973, No. 109, §1; Acts 1975, No. 327, §1; Acts 1976, No. 657, §1; Acts 1979, No. 74, §1, eff. June 29, 1979; Acts 1985, No. 515, §1; Acts 1987, No. 654, §1; Acts 1987, No. 862, §1; Acts 1988, No. 779, §2, eff. July 18, 1988; Acts 1989, No. 373, §1; Acts 1989, No. 637, §2; Acts 1990, No. 526, §1; Acts 1992, No. 296, §1; Acts 1993, No. 244, §1; Acts 1993, No. 496, §1; Acts 1999, No. 579, §1; Acts 1999, No. 1359, §1; Acts 2001, No. 1056, §1; Acts 2002, 1st Ex. Sess., No. 128, §2; Acts 2003, No. 1223, §1; Acts 2004, No. 145, §1; Acts 2004, No. 649, §1; Acts 2006, No. 53, §1; Acts 2007, No. 125, §1.
     

    D-DAY

    The Bronx Bull
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Sep 16, 2006
    468
    16
    Hammond
    When he fired the gun, would a reasonable man believe that he had specific intent to kill or cause great bodily harm? If you shoot someone on purpose, you have specific intent. The act is shooting. What did you intend when you shot?

    Well the "intent" might have been to prevent any further bodily harm to his person, but no, no, that's just too heavy to comprehend right now.
     

    charlie12

    Not a Fed.
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Apr 21, 2008
    8,537
    63
    Pride
    RS 14:30.1


    §30.1. Second degree murder

    A. Second degree murder is the killing of a human being:

    (1) When the offender has a specific intent to kill or to inflict great bodily harm; or

    (2) When the offender is engaged in the perpetration or attempted perpetration of aggravated rape, forcible rape, aggravated arson, aggravated burglary, aggravated kidnapping, second degree kidnapping, aggravated escape, assault by drive-by shooting, armed robbery, first degree robbery, second degree robbery, simple robbery, cruelty to juveniles, second degree cruelty to juveniles, or terrorism, even though he has no intent to kill or to inflict great bodily harm.

    (3) When the offender unlawfully distributes or dispenses a controlled dangerous substance listed in Schedules I or II of the Uniform Controlled Dangerous Substances Law* which is the direct cause of the death of the recipient who ingested or consumed the controlled dangerous substance.

    (4) When the offender unlawfully distributes or dispenses a controlled dangerous substance listed in Schedules I or II of the Uniform Controlled Dangerous Substances Law* to another who subsequently distributes or dispenses such controlled dangerous substance which is the direct cause of the death of the person who ingested or consumed the controlled dangerous substance.

    B. Whoever commits the crime of second degree murder shall be punished by life imprisonment at hard labor without benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence.

    Added by Acts 1973, No. 111, §1. Amended by Acts 1975, No. 380, §1; Acts 1976, No. 657, §2; Acts 1977, No. 121, §1; Acts 1978, No. 796, §1; Acts 1979, No. 74, §1, eff. June 29, 1979; Acts 1987, No. 465, §1; Acts 1987, No. 653, §1; Acts 1993, No. 496, §1; Acts 1997, No. 563, §1; Acts 1997, No. 899, §1; Acts 2006, No. 53, §1; Acts 2008, No. 451, §2, eff. June 25, 2008.

    *NOTE: R.S. 40:961 et seq.
     

    John_L

    FTRB
    Rating - 100%
    15   0   0
    Feb 19, 2009
    72
    8
    Lafayette, LA
    My understanding is "lying in wait" flips the First Degree switch. Unless some folks around here have more information than what we've seen so far, I don't see that. Not that it's not possible, of course. And certainly his posts on numerous discussion boards won't be much help to his defense attorney.
     
    Last edited:

    D-DAY

    The Bronx Bull
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Sep 16, 2006
    468
    16
    Hammond
    (6) When the offender has the specific intent to kill or to inflict great bodily harm while engaged in the distribution, exchange, sale, or purchase, or any attempt thereof, of a controlled dangerous substance listed in Schedules I, II, III, IV, or V of the Uniform Controlled Dangerous Substances Law.


    There it is. Now you just have to prove it!


    ETA: Can I just say how much I loath, detest, and abhor the CDS act and all the evil it has caused. And I am not even talking about this case.
     
    Last edited:

    D-DAY

    The Bronx Bull
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Sep 16, 2006
    468
    16
    Hammond
    And your law degree came from where?

    That is a perfectly logical scenario that is simply overshadowed by the alleged fact that a drug deal was taking place.

    Take out the "drug deal" and this might just become self-defense.
     
    Last edited:

    Narco

    0-60 in 5.11
    Rating - 100%
    71   0   0
    Jun 6, 2007
    2,403
    36
    New Orleans
    That is a perfectly logical scenario that is simply overshadowed by the alleged fact that a drug deal was taking place.

    Take out the "drug deal" and this might just become self-defense.

    on who's behalf.. the homeowner or the guy who travled 2 hours to get there.
     

    Narco

    0-60 in 5.11
    Rating - 100%
    71   0   0
    Jun 6, 2007
    2,403
    36
    New Orleans
    (6) When the offender has the specific intent to kill or to inflict great bodily harm while engaged in the distribution, exchange, sale, or purchase, or any attempt thereof, of a controlled dangerous substance listed in Schedules I, II, III, IV, or V of the Uniform Controlled Dangerous Substances Law.


    There it is. Now you just have to prove it!


    ETA: Can I just say how much I loath, detest, and abhor the CDS act and all the evil it has caused. And I am not even talking about this case.

    Beacuse crack cocaine, meth, mdma, and herion is so healthy that it should be included in every box of lucky charms and cracker jacks
     

    Narco

    0-60 in 5.11
    Rating - 100%
    71   0   0
    Jun 6, 2007
    2,403
    36
    New Orleans
    +1 to narco for quoting a 30 page thread on another forum.

    +1000 to ilikeporkchops @ arf.com for quoting the entire 30 page thread again. 10 posts down.

    Who says the art of douche-baggery is dead?:rofl:

    hey if it helps bring traffic, good conversation i'm all for it
     

    D-DAY

    The Bronx Bull
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Sep 16, 2006
    468
    16
    Hammond
    on who's behalf.. the homeowner or the guy who travled 2 hours to get there.

    I don't think he hit the boy in the head with a whiffle ball bat. The homeowner seemed to be the agressor striking Anthony from behind with a rifle butt. For all Anthony knew, it was the end of the line for himself, so in an act of self preservation he did the logical thing and tried to stop the threat. IIRC he struck the guy in the stomach area. Had he walked in and Mozambiqued the homeowner, I might could see the "specific intent" part and would agree with Murder 1, but as it stands Murder 2 seems a better fit for now.

    Just speculation mind you, but it seems plausable.
     
    Top Bottom