October 20, 2009

Man chokes to death on a hot dog, and the police are looking for the murderer — somebody who attacked him back in 1965.

A 44-year-old assault is now a homicide.

17 comments:

Geoff Matthews said...

Statute of limitations have expired after 44 years for assault.

If he suffered his injuries from being struck by a car, would the driver be on the hook for manslaughter?

This is over-reach. Sometimes the perp does get away.

Robert Cook said...

Another reason to scorn most prosecutors.

dbp said...

There is no statute of limitations on murder.

They will never catch the assailant though.

traditionalguy said...

They need to put The Closer to work on this case. She never fails. Seriously, the principle that accidents happening to a weakened man is a homocide by the event that weakened the deceased opens too many doors to abuse by government prosecutors of crimes. Leave that to the Civil System.

EDH said...

Crawford was enjoying a favorite meal, an uncooked hot dog in a bun, when he was stricken by a seizure in July.

What a tragedy. Please, tell me the bun at least was toasted.

Michael Hasenstab said...

Excerpted from the news release:

"...police are searching for information about a midget dressed as a chef, and thought to be driving a custom car or truck of some type, possibly with the word "mayer" painted on the side."

Dudley Do-right said...

They're building a legal edifice that will make every one of us guilty of something. There will be no such thing as innocence before the law. We will retain our "freedom" only by maintaining the good favor of a political benefactor.

This is just one more brick. Maybe the law professors should speak up.

Bender said...

There is no statute of limitations on murder

No, but once upon a time, there was such things as commonsense and reason in the law. For example, the year-and-a-day rule and proof of causation.

Patty said...

I admit it. I killed him. But in my defense, it's common knowledge that a hot dog makes me lose control.

Gahrie said...

They're going to try a Black man for murder because he attacked a white man 44 years ago they called him racist names in New York?

Good luck with that. Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson have already alerted the media.

Gahrie said...

*that* called him racist names

former law student said...

None of the ridiculous murder hypoes I had in crim had causation this tenuous.

MadisonMan said...

causation this tenuous.

That was my thought. Unless someone there saw the seizure starting before the choking, how can there be causation?

Man starts to choke on a hot dog, and after passing out has a seizure. Choking is unrelated to the attack.

Why does the prosecutor seek publicity? Is he running for office or something?

Tibore said...

While I agree with the sentiment others here are expressing about prosecutorial overreach, I also have a different take on this case: As a practical matter, it's unrealistic. For an assault that took place but was never investigated with the rigor that a murder case would have had, it's simply unrealistic to presume that anything can be determined at this late date.

There's cold casing, and there's archaeology. This is painfully closer to the last than it is the first.

Fred4Pres said...

Talking about old crimes, how about this nugget from Hot Air today:

Interestingly, the US has not yet submitted a formal extradition request to Switzerland after Polanski’s arrest. The Obama administration has until November 25th to do so, or the Swiss will be forced to release Polanski. Over the next five weeks, we will see if the White House is more interested in appeasing its Hollywood backers or enforcing the law.


We better point this out to people, just so the Obama Administration does not forget.

Drew W said...

Let's see. A black man attacks a white man, who later dies eating a hot dog.

I think it's time for another frank discussion on race.

Ann Althouse said...

@Patty LOL.