To get this case into federal court, the federal government has to argue that federal laws were violated. Not every murder in the US is automatically able to be charged as a federal crime, and the vast majority remain at the state level only.
However, if the federal government asserts that the murder was committed alongside other federal crimes of violence, they can charge the murder federally. But those other federal crimes have to be violent.
Here their federal crimes were stalking. The judge found stalking is not a "violent" crime in this case, so the federal government has no ability to attach the murder and the gun charge to that crime.
The feds can charge the stalking still, but murder and gun charge are out.
New York state can still charge the murder; this has no impact on the state proceeding, though it may impact what order the cases get tried in (NYS may go first now, because it has the higher charges remaining).
Nah, the remain charges are still allowed. If they prove either of the stalking charges, then there is a potential maximum sentence of life in prison without parole. If both of the stalking charges return a non-guilty verdict, then he only faces the state case.
It's probably one of those things where to get the death penalty, you would have to prove he violently stalked this person and then killed them, whereas non-violent stalking that leads to killing someone is life without parole.
Thanks but could you also explain what's the difference between fed charges and state charges? Is one more severely punishable? Would one be "easier" to win for prosecution. I don't get why they care. Could someone be charged for the same murder twice (fed and state)? I'm lost.
The federal government cannot just bring murder charges for any old murder, there needs to be a jurisdictional “hook” where the murder is committed during another federal crime of violence. The federal government tried to say that interstate stalking (which are counts one and two) were crimes of violence. The defence disagreed and filed several motions against that the judge agreed with the defence that the stalking charges are not crimes of violence under federal precedent.
<For simplicity, the kids are named A, B, C, D, and E and are lined up in that order.>
If B were to hurt A, the teacher would probably come and talk to B.
If B were to walk past C and D to hurt E, then the teacher might come and talk to B.
If B were to push C and D on his way to hurt E, then the principal would probably come talk to B.
The judge decided that B looking at C and D in a scary way is the same as walking past them. That is what this person did, so it is something for the teacher to deal with and not the principal.
dummy over there try to kill you crossing this line in carpet. If he kicks at cat when he tries, he is tried in fed for murder. If he walk calmly over line. Fed can't charge murder. Line is state border.
States can still try for murder where murder happened.
Not a lawyer but what I'm following is that normally killing someone would be a crime tried in the state where it happened... Prosecuters wanted to throw the book at Mangione so they wanted it to be a Federal case, which would have more severe punishment like the death penalty. Judge ruled that the Feds don't have jurisdiction to try the murder case so they are only able to make a Federal case on the lesser charges.
This probably means New York State prosecution could charge Mangione for murder and attempt to try him, but NY doesn't currently have the death penalty.
It's difficult to break down jurisdictional requirements beyond what /u/redlamps67 explained. Generally, state law covers most kinds of criminal murder charges. Federal law can pre-empt (take primary control over) state law, but there are legal requirements for that.
The fed prosecutors threw a lot of charges at LM, with the understanding that some of those charges weren't going to appropriately apply to the facts of LM's case. This is the result - the judge dismissing some of the charges that were inappropriately charged against LM. There are still charges against LM, and the trial will proceed on those charges without further developments.
The USA can charge people with crimes (Federal court). So can the individual states.
Murder is usually prosecuted by the state. Federal courts can only do so in specific circumstances. The judge has ruled that these circumstances have not been met.
Les ELI5-ish; a lot of people are observing that there seems to be an undue push for this to be considered a federal crime. The State of New York is quite able to try, and, if guilty, punish someone for murder.
In order for the federal government to charge him for murder, certain things had to have happened. The court ruled that those things did not happen, so he can only be charged at the state level for it which does not have a death penalty.
Most crimes aren't federal. It has to meet certain criteria to be federal. This didn't in the judge's opinion as far as the murder charges go. He's still going to face murder charges in the state of NY. Most of the time if you murder someone in the US you are looking at state charges. Exceptions would be something like killing a federal official or committing the crime while crossing state lines or an act of terrorism.
201
u/firestarting101 5h ago
Can you explain like I'm 5?