Seriously?Eigenbasis wrote:Well, he's being charged with a hate crime right now. If this wasn't a bias incident? I really don't know what would be just. Maybe manslaughter with the degree corresponding to how responsible he was.Raccoon wrote: But what do you mean by "punished"? It's one thing to say that the defendant may have committed a tort (i.e., a civil wrong) for which he should pay compensation to the victim (or victim's estate). This seems to be what you have in mind from the privacy tort discussion that follows. It's altogether different to say that the defendant should be punished through the criminal process, which is what seems to be happened now.
Manslaughter means that you believe the defendant had the mental state to support an intent to kill, mitigated by some kind of heat of the moment passion. Whatever else you think about this kid, and I don't defend what he did, it's absurd to charge him with any kind of intentional homicide.