[Vision2020] Say What??????

[Andreas Schou]

Oh, never mind, I guess that's Washington. Looks like Idaho doesn't
require loss of human life, just that they burn down a structure
generally occupied by humans. Still, roughly the same principle.

-- ACS

On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 3:07 PM, Andreas Schou <ophite at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 2:52 PM, keely emerinemix <kjajmix1 at msn.com> wrote:
>> I'm glad this is going to be resolved without the county's financial
>> collapse, but doesn't 15 years for manslaughter -- the wanton, willful
>> destruction of a human life, and in this case a premeditated willingness not
>> reflected in the plea -- seem odd in light of 25 years for the wanton,
>> willful destruction of property?
>
> As I understand it, Arson 1 is reserved for arsons resulting in loss
> of human life, or arsons designed to cover up another crime. In this
> case, as is usual, I suspect it's a fallback charge for when the arson
> has actually destroyed some important evidence. The actual crimes in
> the final accounting are a travesty, but the numbers -- 40 years,
> which is essentially 'all meaningful parts of his life' -- are pretty
> close to what I expected when they  walked back from the original
> capital charge.
>
> -- ACS
>