A legal anomaly?

[chickenfeet]

On Boxing Day, a fifteen year old girl was killed while shopping. She was hit by a single stray bullet after a gun fight broke out between two youths in a busy part of downtown. Police have arrested the two alleged gunmen and charged them with fire arms related offences. No-one has been charged with murder because they haven't identified who fired the fatal shot. Surely there is something wrong with the law here? Both gunmen are equally culpable and should face murder charges. If a person or persons open(s) up unlawfully with a fire arm in a crowded place, purposing the death of Person A or B, they are surely equally culpable if person X, Y or Z is killed, regardless of which gunman fired the fatal shot.

Comments

[gregclow.livejournal.com]

My understanding is that there were more than two people firing the shots - after all, the two that have been arrested were fleeing together and were caught at the same location, so it's unlikely that they were shooting at each other.

As such, it's quite possible that the bullet that killed the girl (or those that injured the other bystanders, for that matter) weren't fired by either of the arrested youths, but by someone else entirely.

If it can't be proven that either of the arrested youths actually hit anybody, I think the most they can be charged with are weapons possession and reckless endangerment or something similar.

[lnr]

Regardless of if they were shooting at each other they were both shooting in a crowded place and someone got killed. Unless there was a *very* good reason they ought to be able to be charged with something with a similar penalty to murder.

[gregclow.livejournal.com]

Ought to be - yes, perhaps. But our current legal system doesn't define "murder" that way. That's all I'm saying.