No Jail Time for "Rampage"???

by mattman73 on Jul 18, 2008 2:14 PM EDT

No Jail Time for "Rampage"???

First and foremost I hope Rampage gets the help he needs and gets his life back together.

But there are a lot of other people involved in this situation. Specifically all the people he could have killed.

Where is the level of concern for their rights and what happened to them?

I keep reading people don't think he will do very much jail time if any.

I don't know.

Cause I still think it's 3 counts of hit and run.

I mean he hit 3 different cars and kept going.

If you kill 5 people it's not 1 murder charge it's 5.

I don't see the difference.

Each person he hit deserves to be accounted for with a separate charge don't they?(Whether it's felony hit and run or misdemeanor hit and run.)

Not to mention the 2 separate incidents of almost running people over on the sidewalk. Sending 2 different groups of people fleeing for their lives according to reports.

If your in the process of evading the police and you endanger people's lives in that manner isn't that another 2 counts of reckless endangerment or something?

I don't mean to pile on but I don't understand how those things can be overlooked.

Don't those people he almost ran over deserve to be accounted for also. To me it's almost like attempted murder. When you try to shoot someone and you don't actually succeed in killing them it's attempted murder. Well if they wouldn't have gotten out of the way it could have been murder or manslaughter. But he still tried to run them over no matter how you look at it. At the very least he put them in danger recklessly. Why don't they deserve to be represented with a charge accounting for the actions against them?

Now look I don't think this fits his personality and hopefully whatever is wrong with him gets straightened out but at some point you have to look at this from the perspective of the people he very easily could have killed and the need for them to be fairly accounted for also.

I know a lot of people are saying well he just wasn't in the right mental state and he should just get off with a some probation and fines or whatever.

Well to me it's 3 hit cars and 2 incidents of almost running people over on the sidewalk.

That is 5 times he could have very easily killed someone. Just because he didn't means we just forget about it?

What about all the people he could have killed do they think he should get off with just probation?

Any thoughts?

The FanPosts are solely the subjective opinions of Bloody Elbow readers and do not necessarily reflect the views of Bloody Elbow editors or staff.

Tweet Comment 22 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I understand your sentiment but I think a few points need to be address:

1) Any of those people can sue Rampage, from the people in the car to the people on the streets, they all can effectuate their rights in civil court.

2) The criminal aspect of the car collisions come from his fleeing the scene, but you seem to be arguing that his action of hitting the other cars needs to be punished criminally. How is this different from the many other sideswiping incidents that happen daily on the freeways of California?

Unless you are arguing that every person that causes a car accident needs to be punished criminally because of the dangerous nature of car accidents on the freeway then you can’t say that just because his collision with another car could have possibly resulted in a death that he needs to face jail time.

Car collisions happen all the time. They are an accepted part of society. The problem with Rampage’s actions is that he failed to follow the proper procedure after he collided with the other cars. For that, he should face criminal charges.

3) None of us have seen the collisions nor have any idea of how serious they were. I have a feeling the people who want to see him criminally punished are the ones imagining him ramming into other cars and running them off the road while the people who are against it see it as bumping the side of the car as he drove past them. Its extremely hard to render judgment either way without knowing all the facts.

I think everyone needs to reserve judgment until we get all of the facts from the incident, otherwise we are arguing based on what we imagine happened rather then what actually happened.

by Day Man on Jul 18, 2008 3:20 PM EDT reply actions

Mattman…everything pretty much solely depends on the results of this mental evaulation that Rampage is currently undergoing. If it’s somehow determined that he was affected by some type of disorder or something…that will be taken into consideration IMO.

http://tharealness.wordpress.com/

by Tha Realness on Jul 18, 2008 3:21 PM EDT reply actions

How about from the perspective of the other people involved?

So are you telling me the people he could have hurt only should expect to have their rights accounted for in civil court? Where they take the burden on themselves and have to hire their own lawyer.

Why shouldn’t those people expect their rights to be accounted for in criminal court?

Wasn’t what happened to them criminal in nature being that he didn’t stop and had to assuredly know he hit them?

While running from the cops and almost running over people on the sidewalk those people shouldn’t expect to have their interests represented in a criminal sense either?

Are you tell me almost running over people while running from the cops shouldn’t be looked at as criminal?

I realize the mental evaluation will have an impact on the proceedings but what about from the perspective of the people he could have hurt?

Don’t they all deserve to have all their best interests looked after by the DA also?

by mattman73 on Jul 18, 2008 3:35 PM EDT reply actions

Just wondering?

by mattman73 on Jul 18, 2008 4:39 PM EDT reply actions

Just wondering?

Don’t get wrong here I don’t think Rampage deserves life or anything like that.

Hell I don’t think he even deserves 5 years.

But shouldn’t all the people he could have very easily killed expect him to get something?

I mean if someone is running from the cops and hits my car or almost runs me over I look at that like he endangered my life and could have killed me.

Wouldn’t you?

I would want to see a charge against that person representing the fact that it happened and that it’s unacceptable.

Why shouldn’t each person he put endanger expect that?

by mattman73 on Jul 18, 2008 4:47 PM EDT reply actions

lol im sure the insurance (or Rampages insurance) will cover the damaged cars just like in any other car accident. If it is not …it can be handles like any other lawsuit when someone hits you on the road. Just like the first poster said …how is it different from swirwing out of control in your every day driving and hitting a few cars.

We dont exactly know what happened with rampage. Unless he was intentionally ramming into the cars, that part of the incident he shouldnt be criminally responsible for.

Running from the police is a criminal act … damaging any cars while running from the police, or ramming the police cars during the pursuit would also be a criminal offense.

by Sauce on Jul 18, 2008 6:13 PM EDT reply actions

What?

Your telling me hitting a couple cars on the freeway and not stopping is a not a criminal offense.

Well it may not have been if he didn’t realize it.

But once he started running from the cops I’m pretty sure that is like admitting he is running from the scene of an accident.

Isn’t that hit and run?

As far as how it’s different is most people stop when they hit other peoples car especially on the freeway. It’s not like it was a parked car in a parking lot and nobody was in it.

I’m sorry but explain to me how hitting two cars and running isn’t criminal.

If you know it happened and you keep going it’s criminal. I don’t know how you come to that conclusion.

Hell if you hit a parked car in a parking lot and you know it happened and you don’t at the least leave a note it’s a criminal offense.

by mattman73 on Jul 18, 2008 6:42 PM EDT reply actions

If you don't believe that...

Check this out then.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21211434/

Do I need say more?

She hit a parked car in a parking lot and didn’t leave a note and got charged with hit and run.

Please explain to me the difference.

by mattman73 on Jul 18, 2008 6:49 PM EDT reply actions

You’re really stretching at this point. MMA Payout even had a famous crim law professor from UCLA comment this morning that jail time was highly unlikely.

It seems that you’re arguing for a justice system that is different than the one we have. That’s legitimate, but doesn’t really have a bearing on things here. One of the biggest factors in criminal law people don’t understand is prosecutorial discretion.

This is the most important quote from the piece: "The key is on the most serious crime," Prof. Arenella told MMAPayout.com. "If he is convicted of the most serious crime, they aren’t going to lump on sentencing for smaller crimes. We’re looking at a maximum of a year. And if he’s a first time offender, we’re looking at just a fine or small jail time."

Obviously you can make an argument each one that happened in the chase was a crime, but they just won’t do it that way. Those people will have civil remedies, which is really what they will want anyway.

by Michael Rome on Jul 18, 2008 7:53 PM EDT reply actions

I am reaching but this is for discussion right?

Plus why is it so far fetched to think he could get charged with 3 counts of hit and run for what he did compared to what Britney Spears did in the link I posted.

She hit an empty car in a parking lot and left without leaving a note or anything.

She got charged with one count of hit and run.

I would think his circumstances would warrant a little harsher punishment.

I mean it’s not like she is a hardened criminal with a long rap sheet.

So why is what I’m suggesting so far fetched?

by mattman73 on Jul 18, 2008 8:11 PM EDT reply actions

See Rome’s point about prosecutorial discretion. Its a lot easier to bring a case against someone when you have the whole thing on tape, therefore, the prosecutor is much more likely to charge her for that.

by Day Man on Jul 18, 2008 8:25 PM EDT reply actions

You mean all the eye witnesses on the freeway wouldn’t be the same as video?

Still she get 1 count of hit and run for leaving after hitting a parked car with nobody in it in a parking lot.

He hits three cars with people in them and he will get the same 1 charge of hit and run.

Please explain how that makes sense?

by mattman73 on Jul 18, 2008 8:48 PM EDT reply actions

It doesn’t seem like we’re gonna get anywhere with this one so I’ll just address your points quickly.

1) Witnesses have to be brought in to give testimony. On top of that they are biased which the jury knows. As far as the witnesses who were there that weren’t involved, you have to find them, depose them, get them to testify. So no, its not the same as a video that costs nothing to show and the jury will trust because they got to see the event unfold with their own eyes.

2) There is a penalty range for each charge. Just because were charged with the same crime doesn’t mean they would get the same penalty if found guilty. The factors you mentioned will be taken into account during sentencing.

by Day Man on Jul 18, 2008 9:01 PM EDT reply actions

Isn't this for discussion should I not argue my case?

What’s wrong with bringing witnesses forward and deposing them and having them testify?

Isn’t that what an investigation is all about?

You mean just like the video that got R. Kelley off because it could have been doctored?

That kind of video isn’t as good as real witnesses that seen it happen?

Look I’m not an idiot nobody has just gave me a good enough reason to understand why hitting 3 different cars and fleeing is not 3 counts of hit and run.

Hitting one car in a parking lot and leaving got Brittney one count of hit and run.

Why wouldn’t hitting 3 different cars and leaving in a hurry get you 3 counts of hit and run?

I realize you think I’m being difficult and I that I’m probably some idiot but that isn’t the case.

by mattman73 on Jul 18, 2008 9:28 PM EDT up reply actions

Not in any way condoning what he did, but…

He didn’t really injure anyone beyond needing a medical evaluation and check.

We all get our charges dropped down, why shouldn’t he?

Is it wrong if my speeding ticket gets dropped to mechanical defect? Surely the potential was there for me to kill someone if I lost control?

Do you really want him spending 3 hours in jail like that Kardashian chick?

Let him get the help, plead down, pay his fines and do some community service. I’m sorry, but you can’t convict someone on what could have happened, only on what did.

I sincerely hope he gets any help he needs or at least learns from his mistake, but the chick in the Escalade filing a civil suit the day after the incident, reeks of money grubbing, imo.

"They said you was hung!!"

"And they was RIGHT!"

by BJJDenver on Jul 18, 2008 9:11 PM EDT reply actions

This pretty much says it all

I’m sorry, but you can’t convict someone on what could have happened, only on what did.

The only difference in that is intent. Did he intend to cause harm with his vehicle? Attempted murder/rape are criminal offenses, because of their severity. So if it could be proven that he was trying to kill the five* people mentioned previously, then you’d have something for what ‘might have been.’

Otherwise, no. This basically is a discussion about how our legal system should work, not about how it actually does work. Totally separate conversations, that only look similar from a certain perspective.

by misterjonez on Jul 18, 2008 9:40 PM EDT up reply actions

O.k. this is close...

I realize he didn’t hurt anyone and they have previously convinced me that it would just be a misdemeanor hit and run because of that.

But why wouldn’t it be 3 counts of misdemeanor hit and run?

I mean he hit 3 different cars with 3 different people.

I do see your point about everybody getting their charges dropped down and I agree with that.

But shouldn’t he initially be charged with the 3 counts of misdemeanor hit and run for the 3 separate cars he hit and then the decision can be made to drop the charges?

Look I am not locked in on him doing any jail time or whatever the punishment may be.

I realize all the other things that can transpire to have charges dropped or whatever. Whether it’s not having enough witnesses to corroborate the events or some lack of evidence for a certain charge.

My whole intention is figuring out why he shouldn’t be initially charged with 3 counts of misdemeanor hit and run.

by mattman73 on Jul 18, 2008 9:43 PM EDT up reply actions

I'm trying to make up my mind....

Look the whole idea behind this post was trying to decide if he deserved jail time if any.

I just didn’t feel like I could make that decision without considering all the charges and looking at all the evidence and I wasn’t convinced that all he has been charged with is all that he will be charged with.

A big problem for me was why it isn’t 3 counts of hit and run and if there was a possibility the people he almost ran over on the sidewalk wasn’t another potential charge.

Maybe I just went about it the wrong way but I’m not advocating for a certain punishment or whatever I was just wanting a discussion that would help me decide whether all the charges are as they will be and I’m still not convinced on that part of it.

by mattman73 on Jul 18, 2008 10:08 PM EDT up reply actions

Penalty

Make him fight Wandy for free under Pride rules. That’ll settle the whole thing.

by DarceYou on Jul 18, 2008 11:48 PM EDT reply actions

Images of a Running Man-esque preview

are dancing through my head ;)

“In a world where the prison population was spiraling out of control, and public apathy was at an all-time high, one man defied convention and introduced a system which would solve both problems with one blow”

(Cue the Dana White video, having a press conference at the White House)
‘Criminal punishment has been too lenient in this country for far too long. It’s time we made these men pay for their crimes, and simultaneously give back to the community they’ve so egregiously wronged. We shouldn’t have to support these animals any longer. It’s time they received the proper sentence for their crimes.’

badass music rolls to hyper-edited fight sequences

“Starring Wanderlei ‘The Axe Murderer’ Silva, Quiton ‘Rampage’ Jackson, and a special appearance by ‘Iron’ Mike Tyson. Get ready..for: ULTIMATE PUNISHMENT”

Coming Next Summer.

by misterjonez on Jul 19, 2008 1:31 AM EDT up reply actions

Dana in the White House

I don’t know if the world is ready for Dana White as President.

But I would go see that movie.

by mattman73 on Jul 19, 2008 2:05 AM EDT up reply actions

I dunno

We survived Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and are apparently willing to subject ourselves to Barack Obama. I would guess we can stomach just about any variation on extreme weirdness we get tossed.

Dana would be hilarious in meetings with Vladimir Putin, or Ahmadinejad. Come to think of it, I’d pay $50 to see him across the table from Kim Jong-il.

by misterjonez on Jul 19, 2008 2:23 AM EDT up reply actions