Neo-Nazi convicted of murder in Charlottesville car assault that killed Heather Heyer

[TomSea]

Neo-Nazi convicted of murder in Charlottesville car assault that killed Heather Heyer
Mike James, USA TODAY
Published 5:41 p.m. ET Dec. 7, 2018 | Updated 6:11 p.m. ET Dec. 7, 2018

In 2017, an assortment of alt-right and far-right affiliated groups gathered in Charlottesville, Virginia to protest the removal of Confederate monuments and names from a city square. It ended in the death of a Charlottesville woman. USA TODAY

A man with neo-Nazi beliefs whose brazen assault on counterprotesters of a “Unite the Right” rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, last year was found guilty Friday of first-degree murder.

James Alex Fields, Jr. plowed his 2010 Dodge Challenger into the crowd, killing 32-year-old paralegal Heather Heyer. A jury in Charlottesville deliberated for seven hours before convicting Fields, 21, a Nazi sympathizer from Maumee, Ohio.

Read more at: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2018/12/07/neo-nazi-convicted-murder-charlottesville-car-assault-killed-heather-heyer/2243848002/

May she rest in peace, I hope some justice was delivered to her family and friends.

[edpc]

First degree?  That's a reach.  Manslaughter seems more appropriate in the circumstances.  I don't see how they can say it was pre-planned.

[verga]

The fact that he is a neo-Nazi, does not in anyway alter the fact that she was a member of an Antifa mob. Everyone seems to forget that several weeks before the Selma march there was another protest in Marion. No counter-protesters showed up and there was no incident. If the Alt left had just stayed away none of this would have happened. George Soros wants the violence, that is what he is paying for.

[DCPatriot]

First degree?  That's a reach.  Manslaughter seems more appropriate in the circumstances.  I don't see how they can say it was pre-planned.

At the moment he hit that gas peddle out of frustration of being stuck in that crowd/mayhem, the only charge should have been 'manslaughter'.

[Applewood]

First degree?  That's a reach.  Manslaughter seems more appropriate in the circumstances.  I don't see how they can say it was pre-planned.

Maybe not pre-planned, but it was deliberate.   

But the article says he faces as sentence of 20 years to life.  That doesn't sound like an appropriate sentence for first degree murder.  First degree usually gets you life or the death penalty.  20 years to life sounds like a lesser charge.  Perhaps there was a deal.  Or maybe the reporter got it wrong?

[Oceander]

First degree?  That's a reach.  Manslaughter seems more appropriate in the circumstances.  I don't see how they can say it was pre-planned.

“Planning” doesn’t take more than a moment or two for these purposes.

[DCPatriot]

“Planning” doesn’t take more than a moment or two for these purposes.

"planning" on making an escape...not planning on killing anybody specifically.

Using your reasoning, any drunk driver that kills somebody is guilty of the same crime.

[Oceander]

"planning" on making an escape...not planning on killing anybody specifically.

Using your reasoning, any drunk driver that kills somebody is guilty of the same crime.

Nope. 

And not only weren’t you there at the scene, you weren’t on the jury, so you have no idea what evidence as to intent or state of mind was introduced, nor how the jury evaluated that evidence. 

And being drunk tends to vitiate the state of mind needed for premeditation.  That’s why being drunk is usually an aggravating factor by itself.

Funny how you’re so damned desperate to defend a clearly guilty neo-Nazi.  Brownshirt much?

[edpc]

“Planning” doesn’t take more than a moment or two for these purposes.

True, but that seems to be a heavy burden to prove, if it was last minute. It’s a totally different story if we had a witness, text, or social media post demonstrating he said something like, “I’m going to mow these guys down.”

[Applewood]

Seems to me, if this guy gets 20 to life, he got off easy.

[Oceander]

True, but that seems to be a heavy burden to prove, if it was last minute. It’s a totally different story if we had a witness, text, or social media post demonstrating he said something like, “I’m going to mow these guys down.”

Nope.  The only question is whether the jury is convinced that he thought about it before he did it. 

[DCPatriot]

Nope. 

And not only weren’t you there at the scene, you weren’t on the jury, so you have no idea what evidence as to intent or state of mind was introduced, nor how the jury evaluated that evidence. 

And being drunk tends to vitiate the state of mind needed for premeditation.  That’s why being drunk is usually an aggravating factor by itself.

Funny how you’re so damned desperate to defend a clearly guilty neo-Nazi.  Brownshirt much?

LOL!  What's "funny" is how pathetic you've become, @Oceander smearing me based upon an opinion. 

[Oceander]

LOL!  What's "funny" is how pathetic you've become, @Oceander smearing me based upon an opinion. 

No smear.  Simply pointing out the obvious inferences that arise from your oh-so-solicitous defense of a nasty little POS who turned his car into a weapon and killed someone with it.

[truth_seeker]

LOL!  What's "funny" is how pathetic you've become, @Oceander smearing me based upon an opinion.

I saw no "defense." I saw a reasonable question.

The Antifa college instructor shwed up at the event, armed with the bike lock which he struck the other man. Clearly pre-meditation.

This guy came by car, and may or may not have premeditated using the car as weapon.

BOTH of them have fore knowledge the implements could be deadly. Theycontinued wielding them, non-the-less.

Both guilty of prmeditation, just as the drinker who gets  behind the wheel.

That is my opinion. Does anybody know of ny defense offered?

See how quickly protests/demonstrations/riots can get out of control?

Four Dead in Ohio.

[DCPatriot]

No smear.  Simply pointing out the obvious inferences that arise from your oh-so-solicitous defense of a nasty little POS who turned his car into a weapon and killed someone with it.

Because I've avidly supported everything this POTUS has done since Summer of 15, you've grouped me as a racist "brownshirt".

Everything else is bullshit.

[Oceander]

Because I've avidly supported everything this POTUS has done since Summer of 15, you've grouped me as a racist "brownshirt".

Everything else is bullshit.

Nope.  Because you’re supporting a neo-Nazi. 

[jmyrlefuller]

First degree?  That's a reach.  Manslaughter seems more appropriate in the circumstances.  I don't see how they can say it was pre-planned.

At most, second-degree. The evidence for premeditated murder, in what by most reliable accounts was already escalating into a riot before the killing, is weak.

Alas, that's the price he paid for having an unpopular opinion AND committing a violent crime like that; the prosecutors are going to overshoot the actual crime just to prove a point, because nobody's going to seriously object to it.

[jmyrlefuller]

Nope.  Because you’re supporting a neo-Nazi.

Being a "neo-Nazi" in and of itself is not a crime, whether you like it or not, even if he's dead wrong. The crime was using his car to run over and kill Heather Heyer.

[Oceander]

Being a "neo-Nazi" in and of itself is not a crime, whether you like it or not, even if he's dead wrong. The crime was using his car to run over and kill Heather Heyer.

Never said it was.  But it’s fascinating to see what sort of criminal gets such solicitous favor and concern here.  So much concern for a POS who turned his car into a lethal weapon and killed someone with it; but God forbid the criminal is someone trying to hop the border - then the derision and bloodlust is epic. 

[edpc]

Never said it was.  But it’s fascinating to see what sort of criminal gets such solicitous favor and concern here.  So much concern for a POS who turned his car into a lethal weapon and killed someone with it; but God forbid the criminal is someone trying to hop the border - then the derision and bloodlust is epic.

Well, in my case, it’s more of a question about the verdict, not sympathy or lack of guilt. Then again, I’m comparing it to a case like Betty Broderick, where premeditation was obvious. Despite that, she had one hung jury, then a second degree conviction in the retrial.

[Oceander]

Well, in my case, it’s more of a question about the verdict, not sympathy or lack of guilt. Then again, I’m comparing it to a case like Betty Broderick, where premeditation was obvious. Despite that, she had one hung jury, then a second degree conviction in the retrial.

Fair enough.  That being said, state of mind and intent are matters that are generally inferred from circumstantial evidence, and are the provenance of the jury. If the jury found premeditation, that finding will almost certainly be upheld, not because he’s being railroaded - he’s not - but because the jury so found based on the evidence presented.