Cop Dies of Injury

Should the shooter be brought up on murder charges?

  • Total voters
    23
  • Poll closed .
O

Orleander

OH JOY!!!!
Valued Senior Member
Do you think the man who shot him 40 YEARS AGO should be brought up on new charges? He's already served his time for shooting the cop. But now that the cop has died from complications, should he be charged with murder, which has no statute of limitations?

PHILADELPHIA — A Philadelphia policeman shot while on duty four decades ago died of his injuries this week, raising the possibility of a homicide charge against a man who already served a prison sentence for the shooting, authorities said.

Walter T. Barclay, a rookie officer, was gunned down Nov. 27, 1966, while trying to stop the burglary of a beauty shop in the city's East Oak Lane section. Barclay, who was left a paraplegic, died Sunday at age 64.

William J. Barnes, now 71, was sentenced to a 10- to 20-year term in the shooting.

Chief Inspector of Detectives Joseph Fox said Tuesday that the Bucks County coroner had ruled Barclay's death a homicide stemming from complications from the shooting. Police are talking with prosecutors to decide whether Barnes should now be charged with murder in the case, he said.

The District Attorney's Office issued a short statement Tuesday, saying only, "We intend to review all of the evidence before making a decision in this case." Prosecutors would not elaborate.

Lawyers asked about the case said prosecutors would be on solid legal ground to charge Barnes, but that proving the case would be challenging.

"Complications from a shooting 30 or 40 years ago don't take 30 or 40 years to surface," said Jeffrey Lindy, a former federal prosecutor now working as a defense lawyer. "A medical expert could say it could be from this or it could be from that."

Barclay's sister, Rosalyn Harrison, said her brother suffered "horribly" after the shooting.

"You have no idea what a hard time he had," she said.

Mod Note #2: The link for the above article is - http://www.wtopnews.com/?nid=104&sid=1227714


Mod Note:

(1) Insert link (required)
(2) Erase this note (optional and permissible) upon fulfillment of #1 above.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If it can be proven beyond any doubt that the officer has died because of complications, the shooter should be charged with homicide.
 
That would be a double jeopardy case. He can't be tried twice for anything to do with the offense he committed. The cop COULD have died because of other complications like phenomena or a bacteriologic infection. If he were to be tried they would have to prove that what he did caused the death and nothing else made him die. It won't happen as I said.
 
cosmictraveler said:
That would be a double jeopardy case. He can't be tried twice for anything to do with the offense he committed. ....
Click to expand...

I think he can leaglly be charged. I don't see how it is double jeopardy. :confused:
Lets pretend he was charged with assaulting an officer and served his time. The cop was in a coma for 40 yrs and has now died. Now can he be charged with murder.

I know the details are different, but its basically the same.
 
cosmictraveler said:
That would be a double jeopardy case. He can't be tried twice for anything to do with the offense he committed. The cop COULD have died because of other complications like phenomena or a bacteriologic infection. If he were to be tried they would have to prove that what he did caused the death and nothing else made him die. It won't happen as I said.
Click to expand...

Don't quote me but I don't think it would be DJ in this case. The article doesn't say but if the guy shot the cop and the cop didn't die, it would be attempted murder. But since the cop did die, and if it can be proven that being shot was a direct cause of his eventual death, then the charges could be changed to murder.

EDIT: Yeah, what Orleader said above.
 
No because he was tried for the crime he committed at the time he did the crime. Anything can happen to people over time and to try and PROVE that what happened over 40 years ago was the only way the person died is a very big STRETCH!!
 
Orleander said:
....the Bucks County coroner had ruled Barclay's death a homicide stemming from complications from the shooting....[/I]
Click to expand...

He was not previously charged with homicide. Now it has been ruled a homicide, which is a whole new charge. There goes double jeopardy.

Ethically do you think he should be charged with it or has too much time passed? Or since he has already served time for the incident (not the death) consider it 'time served' and let it go?
 
Mod Hat - Link needed in topic post

The text citation in the topic post requires a link; without it, this topic will be closed.
 
Are you freakin kidding me, no he shouldn't be brought up on charges, he is one of the lucky ones who GOT AWAY with it! Jeez, let the poor man be for cryin out loud.
 
Mod Hat - It's not that ....

Mod Hat - It's not that ....

Orleander said:

wow, really? Does that mean everyone thinks I'm lying?
Click to expand...

Nope, it's a plagiarism concern. As section 7B of the current Forum Rules expresses:

Plagiarism consists of copying another person's writings and passing them off as your own. If you post something somebody else has written, you must name the author, and preferably also reference the source. Posts which include material from elsewhere that is not properly acknowledged will be deleted.
Click to expand...

We're actually fairly lax about this. Including a link for a web-based resource is generally considered sufficient.

We could, I suppose, demand something like MLA or Chicago/Turabian citation, but ye gads, none of us want to enforce it. As we've learned with rules about profanity and respectful conduct, there's only so much we can ask.

While it's also helpful to offset the quotations with an indent or quote tag, this lack, also, is pervasive enough that we are not prepared to make an ironclad rule out of it. Historically, this is something of a decline; in the past, we've been asked to use the quote tag specifically.

Thank ye.
 
Last edited:
First, I think this crime was committed before they changed the laws regarding when its murder. It was first used when people became brain dead via an injury inflicted on them during the commission of a crime. This policeman was paralyzed from the waist down. A grievous injury for sure, but its not murder.

"...problems over the decades included pneumonia, bedsores and recurrent infections. Despite his difficulties, Harrison said her brother regained his independence after the shooting – living in his own apartment, driving a specially equipped car, cooking and shopping for himself.

Barclay spent his last five years in a long-term care facility..."

From this site:
http://www.delawareonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070822/NEWS/70822059

The above conditions are common in people confined to wheelchairs, regardless of the source of their injury. People who are not confined to wheelchairs die of pneumonia and infections.

I dont think they should pursue murder charges in this case.
 
Orleander said:
Do you think the man who shot him 40 YEARS AGO should be brought up on new charges? He's already served his time for shooting the cop. But now that the cop has died from complications, should he be charged with murder, which has no statute of limitations?
Click to expand...

This is the door it would open and it's not necesarily a bad door.
A company is found guilty of toxic waste dumping which led to ill health in a number of people. EVery time one of them dies, perhaps decades later, their families now have a shot at getting more compensation. As just one example.

I will guarantee you this. This kind of thinking will only be used against people without power. People with power will have lawyers and legislators keep this off them.
 
UPDATE

well,
they are charging him with murder
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20588269/

PHILADELPHIA - Four decades after Officer Walter T. Barclay was shot while trying to stop a beauty salon burglary, the gunman who left him paralyzed is being charged with murder, the district attorney said Tuesday....The shooter, William Barnes, is now 71. He served a 15-year sentence for attempted murder after the shooting and now works in a supermarket while living at a halfway house.
 
Let us see if they can make the charges stick. It is one thing to charge someone with something, but convicting them is a whole other story.
 
I see the bleeding-heart liberals have outnumbered the clear-thinkers in the poll. It doesn't matter what excuse you want to offer OR how long it took someone to die - murder is still murder. If indeed the results of the autopsy show positively that his death was the result of the shooting then the chances of conviction are pretty good.
 
Read-Only said:
I see the bleeding-heart liberals have outnumbered the clear-thinkers in the poll. It doesn't matter what excuse you want to offer OR how long it took someone to die - murder is still murder. If indeed the results of the autopsy show positively that his death was the result of the shooting then the chances of conviction are pretty good.
Click to expand...

I only think that the justice system is the only one that will make this decision based on law not on feeling.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top