Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

James Brady's Death Ruled Homicide...

page: 1
11
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 04:34 PM
link   
Just saw this on the Washington Post...

James Brady's Death Ruled a Homicide by VA Medical Examiner

Not too many details, obviously, but this is just nuts!




There was no immediate word on whether the shooter, John W. Hinckley, who has been treated at St. Elizabeth’s psychiatric hospital, could face new criminal charges. He was found not guilty by reason of insanity after he shot Reagan and three others on March 30, 1981.


According to this article: LINK, Brady died as a result from the injuries he received when he was shot back in 1981 by Hinckley.

It is terrible what happened to Brady, ended up spending the rest of his life paralyzed by Hinckley's actions. But, I am having trouble wrapping my head around this one. Did they rule his death a homicide, 30 + years after he was shot, because of who he was? I'm not sure I have ever heard of something like this before, TBH.
edit on 8-8-2014 by lovebeck because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 04:42 PM
link   
They tried and found Hinkley guilty years ago, isn't this double jeopardy?

and yeah...totally bizarre!
edit on 8-8-2014 by Caver78 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 04:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Caver78

I guess the charge of murder would be a new one for which he hadn't been tried yet. Hence, no double jeopardy.
Not saying I agree...



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 04:47 PM
link   
a reply to: lovebeck

I have to disagree (with the ME). This medical examiner is setting a very slippery precedent. It has been 30+ years since he was shot, and although tragic, not homicide just because he died 30 years later. It is not as if he stayed in a vegetative state in a hospital for 30 years and then died, which could be construed as a homicide. This kind of precedent could be used badly.
edit on 8-8-2014 by Halfswede because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 04:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: Caver78
They tried and found Hinkley guilty years ago, isn't this double jeopardy?

and yeah...totally bizarre!


I know! He's been in the state psych ward for years. I'm just perplexed by this. Not sure how this is possible, especially bc he has already been tried and convicted. No word yet on if they will go after Hinckley with homicide charges, yet. Also, I don't believe there is a statute of limitations on murder, but he was shot over 30 years ago. He lived for 30 + more years, albeit as a paraplegic, but he did live.

I feel I gotta add this for anyone who may feel I am supporting Hinckley: I am by no means condoning what Hinckley did, nor am I in anyway defending or supporting him. I just find this story very interesting...



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 04:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Halfswede

That's what I'm sayin'!



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 05:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Halfswede
a reply to: lovebeck

I have to disagree (with the ME). This medical examiner is setting a very slippery precedent. It has been 30+ years since he was shot, and although tragic, not homicide just because he died 30 years later. It is not as if he stayed in a vegetative state in a hospital for 30 years and then died, which could be construed as a homicide. This kind of precedent could be used badly.

That's not accurate. I know of someone who died years after being shot by someone. His death was due by the initial shooting. The guy who pulled the trigger was tried for murder. It's not unheard of.



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 05:12 PM
link   
a reply to: lovebeck

Maybe they are saying the bullet wiggled and moved causing his death?



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 05:30 PM
link   
Why do we still try to make sense of any of this? The ego has really flipped its lid. Its gone manic....now....totally psychotic...the frequency is changing. Who's frequency? YOURS! OURS!



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 05:49 PM
link   
a reply to: lovebeck

This has occurred to civilians as well as law enforcement who have sustained injuries from a gun shot and who later died as complications from it.

Its obviously rare, but possible and lawful.

Were the injuries sustained a factor in the persons death?

The US Attorney has not stated if he will file charges or not. The family is not commenting on his medical issues either so there may be more than what we are reading about.
edit on 8-8-2014 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 06:24 PM
link   
a reply to: lovebeck

I would like to see the autopsy report before making any comment on the ME's ruling.
It hasn't been released. Without it, we have no idea what he based his ruling on.



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 09:13 PM
link   
a reply to: lovebeck

That way his hatred of guns can still follow. It was the gun's fault. This is bs.
Firepiston



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 09:57 PM
link   
Could be an end run to go after Bush Sr & the CIA as the Bush Family & Hinckley Family were close family friends from the oil business .

It was reported at the time that Neil Bush was scheduled to have dinner with Scott Hinckley the shooter's brother the night after the assasination attempt until it was reported in the media.

lol - total coincidence

HINCKLEY AND BUSH FAMILIES WERE CLOSE FRIENDS



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 10:13 PM
link   
Probably has to do with insurance claims or estate.

At least that'd be my guess. By ruling it a homicide additional compensation would go to his benefactors?



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 10:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Rosinitiate
Probably has to do with insurance claims or estate.

At least that'd be my guess. By ruling it a homicide additional compensation would go to his benefactors?


As far as i know you don't get extra benefits for Murder - Accidental Death & Dismemberment - yes but not Murder. I used to pay death claims unless it's something new but selling murder insurance - i dunno seems like a hard sell to me.



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 10:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: BABYBULL24

originally posted by: Rosinitiate
Probably has to do with insurance claims or estate.

At least that'd be my guess. By ruling it a homicide additional compensation would go to his benefactors?


As far as i know you don't get extra benefits for Murder - Accidental Death & Dismemberment - yes but not Murder. I used to pay death claims unless it's something new but selling murder insurance - i dunno seems like a hard sell to me.


I'd still bet its money related, always is. Ruling it a homicide makes it a wrongful death and although there might not be anything to sue for perhaps there are loopholes........you know, my random guess is still as good as arguing (ME) on behalf of double jeopardy.
edit on 8-8-2014 by Rosinitiate because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 10:51 PM
link   
a reply to: lovebeck

Give me a break.



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 11:00 PM
link   
I have a problem with this. Brady could have died of a heart attack. His heart attack could have come about by diet, anything, even being in a wheelchair.

Basically, anything he died of could be associated with the gun shot wound from years ago.



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 11:13 PM
link   
a reply to: lovebeck

Dying as the result of a gun shot wound puts the responsibility
on the trigger man and can only be charged after the victims death.
And so it should be whether the victim dies in 30 minutes or 30
years. Not even debatable.

But I thought Brady was already dead.



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 11:26 PM
link   
So I could get shot in the leg when I was 20.

As a result, I now have a limp. (30 years later)

Because of the limp, I am slow in crossing the street where I get hit by a car.

I'm dead now, as a result of a gun shot wound?






top topics



 
11
<<   2 >>

log in

join