FLORIDA CRIMINAL LAW MUST BE CORRECT
Jennifer Mee was convicted of first degree murder and sentenced to life in prison without parole when she was 19 years old, but her case highlights some serious flaws in the mindset of those responsible in her long sentence and the logic behind the law in Florida that says that those who are part of a fatal robbery are equally guilty of murder as the person who committed the actual murder.
Jennifer made a date with a young man she had met on Facebook, however, her intention was to rob him with the help of two male partners. He only on the other hand had the impression that he was going to have a date with Jennifer. At no point did he intend to kill him.
The question is “Who is responsible for the discharge of a firearm?”
It really should be the person who owns it. To suggest that others are equally responsible is the same as saying “The passengers of a motor vehicle are just as guilty of driving under the influence as the person behind the wheel.” It all comes down to putting sole responsibility on whoever has control of the firearm and on no one else.
In Jennifer’s case, she had nothing to do with the actual murder. It was neither premeditated nor intentional.
His crime does not fit the definition of murder, but rather homicide.
What really surprised people was when his sentence, “Life in prison without the possibility of parole,” was announced.
How could a judge justify the sentence Jennifer received when there are premeditated murder cases that earn offenders a much lesser sentence and can see the light at the end of the tunnel?
The Governor of Florida has the ability to grant clemency to any inmate, so it is up to him to do the right thing in Jennifer’s case.
Why does the United States sentence offenders to life in prison without the possibility of parole when other countries do not have such harsh sentences?
It is indisputable that some criminals cannot be rehabilitated, but Jennifer’s is not one of them. Her crime seemed to be based on the reasoning: “If she had not done this or that thing, then this would not have happened.”
There was a media frenzy at Jennifer’s trial because at age 15 she gained notoriety as the “Hiccup Girl” when she had incurable cases of hiccups. When I was 19 years old, the hiccup problem was cured. There was a lot of excitement at Jennifer’s trial, as you would expect in a trial where the victim passed away, but the judges are supposed to get over all the excitement. It seems that this was not the case in Jennifer’s case. How could there be any justification for Jennifer’s sentence?
I have written letters to politicians in the United States, but have not received a single reply. If this is how they respond to people who question the way they treat human beings, is it any wonder that people turn to other means to make their point of view understood, as was the case with Black Lives Matter after death? George Floyd in Minneapolis?
If only politicians listened to what’s being said and didn’t try to politicize every event that comes up, be it the coronavirus, the economy, or the Black Lives Matter protests.
It’s no wonder that the Black Lives Matter protests took place recently (2020). America needs to find alternative ways to deal with crime and not just lock them up and throw away the key.
That i would like
1. That adolescents should not be sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole.
2. That when an elderly person is involved in a crime with a minor, the responsibility must fall on the elderly.
3. That whoever is in possession of a firearm should be held responsible for any result / death after it is discharged.
4. That the sentences for those convicted as minors and the money saved by their use for juvenile programs be reduced.
5. That many offenders are sent into the community to do volunteer community work.