The Virginian-Pilot
©
RICHMOND
Michael Edward Clark wasn't killed on June 29, 1976, but the violence that day eventually caused his death.
The 19-year-old Navy sailor was shot in the neck and paralyzed during a robbery that night as he waited for a bus in Portsmouth.
Doctors gave him only days to live.
With love, support and round-the-clock care at his family's suburban Chicago home, he defied those predictions and lived 32 more years.
After Clark died in November from complications due to quadriplegia, an Illinois coroner classified his death a homicide. But Portsmouth prosecutors couldn't file new charges against the man who shot him.
The reason?
Virginia case law prevents murder prosecutions if the victim dies more than one year and one day after the fatal wound was inflicted.
Legislation before the General Assembly would allow prosecution in those circumstances no matter how much time has elapsed.
If legislators agree to the new law, it won't permit new charges in Clark's case. But it might help someone else, supporters say.
"We're not out looking for revenge," Michael's mother, Betty Clark, said during a recent phone interview. "We just think it should be changed."
State Sen. Henry Marsh, D-Richmond, is sponsoring the bill, SB1256, to modify a law that he says is out of date.
His bill was unanimously approved by the Senate last week and now goes to the House of Delegates.
Virginia's Crime Commission studied the year-and-a-day rule in 2002, but the law remained in place, Marsh said. At the time of its publication, the commission study indicated that 32 states had abolished the rule.
Marsh believes Virginia is one of the last states in the nation that still abides by the standard.
Advances in medical technology that can prolong the lives of people who suffer traumatic injuries make the law antiquated, said Randy Clark, one of Michael's seven younger siblings.
"If you kill somebody, you need to pay the price," he said.
To Jacquie Marcellis, the Kendall County, Ill., deputy coroner who ruled Clark's death a homicide, the logic is simple.
"Had he not been shot in the neck he wouldn't have been quadriplegic, and he wouldn't have died from complications of quadriplegia," she said, noting "delayed fatals" are regularly prosecuted in Illinois.
Even if there weren't a legal barrier, pursuing old cases is tough, said Bill Prince, spokesman for Portsmouth Commonwealth's Attorney Earle Mobley.
"It's hard to put on a good trial 30 years later," he said.
In 1976, Edward E. McIntyre was convicted of shooting Clark and given a 76-year prison sentence. He was paroled in 1988 but is serving a 15-year sentence for unrelated charges in Virginia.
That McIntyre was freed early after incapacitating her son still stings, said Betty Clark, 72.
"This guy went back out and committed crimes over and over again. He didn't learn from his ways," she said. "That's so frustrating."
Betty Clark said passing the law would be a tribute to Michael.
"My son was sentenced to a lifetime for quadriplegia. He didn't have a choice of a year and a day."
Julian Walker, (804) 697-1564, julian.walker@pilotonline.com
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Twitter
Google
Yahoo
delayed murder charge
i understand the pain of losing someone you love and prosecutors trying to get the most time they can get i am not in favor of charging someone 35 years after a crime has been committed no one can say this guy would not have gotten in an accident or another mishap you cannot say what could have hapened had it not been for one occurance i would pray and hope that our elected officials have not lost their minds at this crucial time in our country and our state let the dead bury the dead and we move on i have memories of people i have lost including my father at some point we have to move on i agree our prisons are so overcrowded and so many non violent offenders who should be given the chance to become productive members of this society one thing i have learned someone has got to come along and believe in rehabilitation people can be rehabilitaed you aonly talk about the ones who get in trouble again you never talk or make time or stories about the onew who are living productive lives and having their rights restored i tell you what you can change the amount of money a mother gets to feed her children those of us who give would like something back from our government and i am not tal
Say what?
"The person dies years later from complications brought on by lifes little vagaries, then that is not a crime. Life took over."
You mean like that little vagarie of life of having to be confined to a life of a paraplegic BECAUSE HE WAS THE VICTIM OF A MURDER ATTEMPT? Geezz, that's rather cavalier in how that's put, wouldn't you agree?
Lawyers dream...
...about "laws" like this. It is another "honeypot" and source of income for them.
Interesting thought...
A Defense Attorney argues that a person who is brain dead but still breathing be forced to remain on a feeding tube so his client won't be charged for murder. Or maybe argue the point that if there is brain functionality that the person be made to stay on Life Support / resperator again, so the accused won't have to stand trail for murder...
Now with this bill it will be interesting to see if ANY defense attorney argues these points.
another slap at civil liberties
Once tried and convicted of a crime of assault the argument can be made for double jeopardy if the victim dies 40 years later.
The convct was tried for the assault. If the victim survives then that crime has been adjudicated. The person dies years later from complications brought on by lifes little vagaries, then that is not a crime. Life took over.
To pass this law should be challenged by every Constitutional organiation in the country. Due process, double jeopardy, speedy trial, attainder of blood, all the arguments which protects a citizen from being in fear of losing his freedom when he has served his time for a crime. Now, we have to wait 40 years to determine if someone died by nature or by cause of the first coinviction.
The Apostle Paul stated the 'Law" was grievious because it had so many rules no one could every hope to obey them all. That's where we are headed.
NOT DOUBLE JEOPARDY!!
This is definitely not Double Jeopardy. He couldn't be tried for "murder" the first time because the victim was still alive. Now that the victim has died, the suspect can be tried for "murder". Two different crimes. Attempted murder vs. Actual murder. I see no problem with passing this bill.
Burden of proof will always be there
The burden of proof will always be on the prosecution, that will not change. But if doctors/coroners can list the cause of death as being related to the paralysis that was the result of the crime, as appears to be the case HERE, that isn't a long leap to make. This poor guy was robbed of a normal life by any meaningful definition of that term. The slime who did this to him will not have to face aditional charges for his crimes. But hopefully in similar future cases, people who do these things just may! I'm all for it. For those who disagree, I respect their opinions, but obviously I don't share them.
I don't think it's a slippery slope
I don't think it's a slipper slope, because even opening up the possibility of prosecution does not eliminate the burden of proof on the prosecution. They must be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the death was directly caused by the original injury. All the other factors over the long term would easily provide a reasonable doubt for the defense to argue.
Justice Administered A 76 Year Sentence
Who let him out in 1988?
Good!
I say "GOOD!" This poor guy was in a wheelchair for 32 years BECAUSE HE WAS SHOT BY A CRIMINAL! That criminal should have had to spend a commensurate amount of time, i.e., 32 years, in prison, PLUS a minimum of 20 yrears for the crime to begin with! This kid (at the time of the shooting) did nothing except have the bad fortune to be at a place where this lowlife could target him. And he was able to get out of prison?
For those who look at the years lapsed between the actual crime and the guy's death, in this case 32 years, I don't think it would be that hard to prove the murder charge. He was tried and convicted for the original crime, the death is an altogether different result of his orinial crime. He obviously didn't shoot this guy to 'scare him', he meant to kill him! If I were his family, I would be inclined to pay to have this filth hunted down and 'taken out'. At least, relegate HIM to a wheelchair for the rest of his life.