No statue of limitation for US and NATO war crimes against Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Libya.Heinous Crimes, World news Saturday, October 8th, 2011
An Iraqi child shrieking in fear and loss, bathed in the blood of her dead parents. Just one of the million of innocent victims of the US and NATO crimes in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan and Libya.
There is no statue of limitation for the actions taken by the US and NATO when they attacked Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Libya. Their attacks were premeditated homicide. They attacked without cause or provocation. Their actions were taken, not out of legal self-defense, as proven by their admission that Iraq had nothing to do with the attacks of September 11, 2001 against the US, but out of aggression. The FBI has already gone on record stating that Usama bin Laden, the purported accused mastermind of 9/11, had nothing to do with 9/11. The FBI, the US national (federal) police force stated that there was no evidence to link bin Laden to 9/11. That statement alone made the US attacks against Afghanistan and then Iraq illegal.
The US and NATO have waged wars of aggression against Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Libya. The taking of innocent lives is the criminal act known as homicide. There is no immunity for anyone who commits homicide. There is not justification, reason or just cause to commit homicide other than out of self-defense. The US attacked and committed mass homicide against the Iraqi, Afghan, Pakistani and Libyan people. Their actions were premeditated, deliberate and reckless and executed with malice. Leaders of NATO and NATO member leaders are also guilty of homicide as they are all accomplices.
The law enforcement agencies of the United States know that what their leaders have done and continue to do is homicide. They have investigated untold numbers of homicide cases over the years. They know what actions are homicide and what actions are in self-defense. Those who deliberately commit homicide are arrested, incarcerated, brought before the courts, tried, sentenced and punished for their crimes. There is no difference between the actions taken by Charles Manson, OJ Simpson, Robert Pickton, John Wayne Gacy, or Ted Bundy and those taken by George W Bush, Dick Cheney, Tony Blair and now Barack Obama against the innocent people of Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Libya. The US and UK leaders did not act out of self-defense when they planned for (premeditated) and deliberately and recklessly executed, with malice, their attacks against Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Libya.
§ 24.01 Definition of Homicide
[A] Common Law and Statutory Homicide – At very early common law, “homicide” was defined as “the killing of a human being by a human being.” This definition included suicide. However, modern law defines “homicide” as “the killing of a human being by another human being.” Suicide, therefore, is no longer a form of homicide in most statutes. Homicide is divided into two crimes – murder and manslaughter.
 “Human Being” – The common law and majority approaches define the beginning of life as birth for purposes of interpreting the criminal homicide law. A minority of states now treat a viable – or, at times, even nonviable – fetus as a human being under the homicide statute.
Regarding the end of human life, a majority of states, either by statute or judicial decision, have incorporated “brain death” in their definition of “death.”
 “Murder” – The common law definition of “murder” is “the killing of a human being by another human being with malice aforethought.”
 “Manslaughter” – Manslaughter is “an unlawful killing of a human being by another human being without malice aforethought.”
 “Malice” – As the term has developed, a person kills another acts with the requisite “malice” if he possesses any one of four states of mind:
1.) the intention to kill a human being;
2.) the intention to inflict grievous bodily injury on another;
3.) an extremely reckless disregard for the value of human life; or
4.) the intention to commit a felony during the commission or attempted commission of which a death results.
[B] Model Penal Code – A person is guilty of criminal homicide under the Model Code if he unjustifiably and inexcusably takes the life of another human being [MPC § 210.0(1)] purposely, knowingly, recklessly, or negligently. [MPC § 210.1(1)] The Code recognizes three forms of criminal homicide: murder, manslaughter, and (unlike the common law) negligent homicide.
§ 24.02 Murder
[A] Degrees of Murder – At common law, there were no degrees of murder, and murder was a capital offense. Reform of the common law has resulted in the division of murder into degrees, with only murder in the first degree being a capital offense.
[B] Intent to Kill
 “Deliberate and Premeditated” – Typically, a murder involving the specific intent to kill is first-degree murder in jurisdictions that grade the offense by degrees if the homicide was also “deliberate” and “premeditated.”
 “Wilful, Deliberate, Premeditated” – Nearly all states that grade murder by degrees provide that a “wilful, deliberate, premeditated” killing is murder in the first degree.
 “Intent to Inflict Grievous Bodily Injury” – Malice aforethought is implied if a person intends to cause grievous bodily injury to another, but death results. In states that grade murder by degree, this form of malice nearly always constitutes second-degree murder.
 Extreme Recklessness (”Depraved Heart” Murder) – Malice aforethought is implied if a person’s conduct manifests an extreme indifference to the value of human life. In states that separate murder into degrees, this type of murder almost always constitutes second-degree murder.
[C] Model Penal Code – A homicide is murder if the defendant intentionally takes a life, or if he acts with extreme recklessness (i.e., depraved heart murder).
§ 24.03 Felony-Murder
[A] Common Law – At common law, a person is guilty of murder if he kills another person during the commission or attempted commission of any felony. Nearly every state retains the felony-murder rule.
[B] Statutory Law – Under most modern murder statutes, a death that results from the commission of an enumerated felony (usually a dangerous felony, such as arson, rape, robbery, or burglary) constitutes first-degree murder for which the maximum penalty is death or life imprisonment. If a death results from the commission of an unspecified felony, it is second-degree murder. The felony-murder rule authorizes strict liability for a death that results from commission of a felony.
[C] Model Penal Code – The Code also provides for felony-murder by setting forth that extreme recklessness (and, thus, murder) is presumed if the homicide occurs while the defendant is engaged in, or is an accomplice in, the commission, attempted commission, or flight from one of the dangerous felonies specified in the statute. [MPC § 210.2(1)(b)]
[D] Killing by a Non-Felon
 The “Agency” Approach – A majority of states that have considered the issue apply the so-called “agency” theory of felony murder, which precludes any killing committed during the commission of the felon by a person other that the defendant or his accomplices from serving as the basis for felony-murder. However, a killing by an accomplice can be imputed to others involved in the commission of the felony so that felony-murder can be charged against the non-killers.
 “Proximate Causation” Approach – A minority of courts apply the “proximate causation” theory of felony-murder under which a felon is liable for any death proximately resulting from the felony, whether the killer is a felon or a third party.
 “Provocative Act” Doctrine – A felon may be held responsible for the death of another at the hands of a third party, if the basis for the charge is not felony-murder, but instead is founded on what is sometimes termed the “provocative act” doctrine, which is simply a form of reckless homicide, e.g., a felon recklessly provokes a victim to shoot in self-defense, killing an innocent bystander.
Short URL: http://presscore.ca/2014/?p=335