VLBA facility and vehicles damaged on Mauna Kea

[oink]

New one on me but it just sounds like Criminal Mischief with the aggravating factor of endangering others with serious injury or death while in the commission. Probable have just misdemeanor criminal mischief, then criminal mischief over $1,500 and then the one that seriously endangers. FL has one for public utilities which HI may also have. Different flavors to suit the situation.


Pua`a
S. FL
Big Islander to be.

[TomK]

I looked up HRS 705-500(1)(b):

http://law.justia.com/codes/hawaii/2009/...5-0500-htm

"§705-500 Criminal attempt. (1) A person is guilty of an attempt to commit a crime if the person:

(b) Intentionally engages in conduct which, under the circumstances as the person believes them to be, constitutes a substantial step in a course of conduct intended to culminate in the person's commission of the crime."

Clear as mud. I think it means carrying out some act which helps enable the commission of the crime. E.g., if someone robs a bank, then if they acquired a gun and masks beforehand, they might get charged with this.

Oink - the VLBA site is a government facility. I'm not sure if that comes under public utilities or not or if it makes any difference at all.

[oink]

The attempt generally means that you were not able to fulfill the elements required by law definition for the crime (you didn't succeed) but you had intent to commit the crime and took a concrete step towards committing the crime. I'm not sure that was any clearer. Maybe I should have my Public Defender son try explaining it.

Pua`a
S. FL
Big Islander to be.

[TomK]

Thanks, oink, I think your explanation was much better than my example. Still not sure I completely understand it though, probably because it leaves far too much to interpretation.

[Guest]

Anything about this James Coleman? What does he do? Is he the son to the famous kona living disney artist?

This incident happened pretty early in the morning(9-11a.m), maybe he was not high on meth or drugs from the night before. He hasn't looked like he's crazy or sick, at least not in any of the pictures I have seen yet.

Tomk, why do you feel compelled to constantly RIP or pick dakine's statements, theories, and opinions apart?

http://lifehacker.com/the-difference-bet...1732904200

I still have a couple of theories myself, as to what may have transpired atop Maunakea that Morning, before the damage or shining rerun.
Tomk, let me know when you think it would be appropriate to spill my jiberish opinions, mahalo.

[oink]

TomK, also with FL law and probably HI too, the attempt is one level lower than the actual crime. A 1st degree felony becomes a 2nd, a 3rd degree felony becomes a misdemeanor,etc.

Pua`a
S. FL
Big Islander to be.

[Midnight Rambler]

One example of being charged with an attempt is if you had plans and other evidence showing you intended to carry out a bombing, and acquired some amount of explosives, you can be charged with an attempted bombing even if you're caught before doing anything (and even if, for some reason, you can legally possess explosives).

In this case, Coleman is presumably being charged over whatever he intended to do once inside, in addition to actually damaging the outside.

[TomK]

Thanks Oink and Midnight, that makes things a little clearer. I think my initial confusion was the wording in count 7:

"Attempt substantial step"

It just didn't mean anything to me.

[oink]

OK, went back and read #7. It's as M.R. and I said, except it's written in lawyerese. The (run on) sentence establishes #1) That the time and place are within the jurisdiction of the court and charging office and the identity of the defendant. After establishing jurisdiction it continues with: #2) It establishes that he intentionally (not accidentally) engaged in an action to commit the act. #3) That he believed he could carry out the act. #4) That he had the intent to commit the act which is criminal. All of that after establishing jurisdiction and the identity of the defendant was pretty much just quoting the elements of "Criminal Attempt" or whatever HI calls it.

It then lays out the elements for the criminal act he intended to commit, by pretty much just quoting the statute.

None of it is informative as to what he actually did. The original arresting officer's P.C. may have been more informative unless it was just direct filed by the prosecutor. In that case you will have to go to the police Incident Report and probable supplements to learn anything meaningful.

I'm not sure that that was at all helpful.

Pua`a
S. FL
Big Islander to be.

[TomK]

Thanks, Oink. That was helpful, and appreciate you taking the time to explain things. It was certainly a lot clearer than trying to understand lawyerese.