On Friday, I caught a few moments of ESPN's "SportsCenter" and was struck by a comment by the announcer, whom I did not recognize. He said that the South African sprinter known as the Blade Runner was guilty of murder.

Well, he didn't use the word guilty. But he called the slaying, killing, shooting death of model Reeva Steenkamp a "murder."

Oops.

Murder is a legal term, and it is often misused by journalists, especially when talking on radio, audio or video reports. Typically, or really, most of the time, the impact is minimal or non-existent.

For instance, today in Farmington, there's the story of the court employee who was killed over the weekend, her dismembered body found and her boyfriend awaiting charges. It's pretty clear a crime was committed, considering the act to hide the body. But, it may still be an accidental death (a manslaughter or even a non-criminal accident) and the only crime is the destruction of the body.

Ultimately, it is a jury or possibly a judge who will rule that a slaying is a murder, or a judge accepting a plea from a defendant.

But with the Oscar Pistorius case, she was shot. He admitted it, it seems, claiming it was an accident. And he has been charged with murder.

To call her death a murder is to take the next step and convict him.



Even with all the sources in the world, it is not a news outlet who gets to convict the sprinter. It is the judge or jury. Otherwise, it's not murder. It's a slaying, a killing, a shooting, a homicide, a tragedy. Lots of other ways exist to describe the taking of a life, but murder is not an option. 

Well, to detractors, he's not a goat, but potentially a killer. Words like murder and coverup are used to describe Lewis' trip to watch the Super Bowl in Atlanta in 2000.

With the star linebacker's impending retirement and surprise return to the Super Bowl, the leader of the Baltimore Ravens is back in the headlines and columnists' scopes as he is lavished with praise for his on-field skills, his on-field leadership and his off-field charity work and positive lifestyle.

Not all are so impressed, bringing up the double murder charges (even if you don't stab someone, if you are there and part of an effort to conceal everyone's involvement, you are potentially vulnerable to top murder charges) as well as his marital status and offspring.

Lewis, in what was one of the biggest stories of that winter, saw his murder charges dismissed when he agreed to testify against two others. They were acquitted eventually, and he pleaded to a misdemeanor charge related to obstructing police. Many questions still are asked, especially about missing evidence (his clothes, which some insist were bloodied) and about the settled civil suit.

When he did win a Super Bowl, it wasn't Lewis going to Disney, his reputation still sullied. But now, with time passed and his staying with his team and being a positive leader (he doesn't whine about money, playing time, endorsements -- many of the things that sports fan are sick of athletes doing), it's his time to shine, maybe.

Maybe not, though, if enough complain publicly and enough bring up the past, such as USA Today.

I don't know what happened, but lying about an investigation, to me, indicates involvement. There are times to hope to stay hidden and there are times to step to the plate and be an adult and share what you know. A murder investigation is a time to be a man and responsible member of society. Likewise, many people believe 'snitching' is the greatest sin and that is deplorable behavior when lives are taken.


What I do know is that Lewis is a strange character, his emotionally charged behavior after games, almost like a traveling preacher being overtaken by the spirit. Very strange stuff. It makes good photos and good video, but that post-game interview was weird stuff.

Some of the debate about the guns is proving very laughable.

NBC News reported that a lawmaker in Texas defended on Fox News Sunday morning the availability of high powered 'assault' rifles - as many call them - to protect Americans against a tyrannical government. I'm rushing now but I've gotta look this up and watch, for it may be as funny as it sounds.

I'm sure he's not advocating shooting police officers, the front line of the government (local, state or federal, yes, but officers represent law and order and hence government in general). Don't need fancy weapons for that... just ask the families of the many officers gunned down when responding to typical calls. One in East Grand Rapids was killed with a shotgun by a man lying in wait as the officer responded to a call for help reporting domestic violence.

Then there's Patrick O'Rourke's family, mourning the loss of their father and husband, a longtime West Bloomfield police officer.

But I get it, this Texas gentleman is referring to the federal government, which taxes us and interacts with other countries through the United Nations. So if wants weapons available to fight that government, he'll need to legalize surface-to-air rocket launchers and small nuclear weapons, because nowadays, no militia is going to go up against our U.S. military and do any damage.

If that fight is going to be fought, it will be unarmed people being killed in what we now call terrorist acts. Is this political debate becoming so irresponsible? (And I'm not even considering the ludicrous idea of requiring teachers and administrators to be armed and trained to fight off other armed militants.... you know how much more taxes we would have to pay for schools if that were mandated?)

Here are the comments of Texas, hm, er, U.S. Rep. Louie Gohmert, as quoted by Livewire.com's Talking Points Memo:

"Well, for the reason George Washington said a free people should be an armed people," Gohmert said, responding to a question on why people need assault weapons. "It ensures against the tyranny of the government. If they know that the biggest army is the American people, then you don’t have the tyranny that came from King George. That is why it was put in there, that’s why once you start drawing the line, where do you stop? And that’s why it is important to not just look emotionally, our reaction, Chris, is to immediately say, 'let’s get rid of all guns.'" 

Gohmert argued that more guns would lessen gun violence, saying he wished the principle at Sandy Hook Elementary School that was attacked Friday had been armed. "I wish to god she had had an M-4 in her office, locked up so when she heard gunfire, she pulls it out and she didn’t have to lunge heroically with nothing in her hands, but she takes him out, takes his head off before he can kill those precious kids," he said.

Reminds me of the Simpsons, with Homer asking Lisa if she wants the king of England pushing her around. He's living in a fantasyland, where King George is still being fought and answers to problems are taking "his head off." Wow,

Of course, if we are fighting tyranny, I could use a nuke or two. I can be trusted. Believe me, I'm responsible enough to have a button to push. 

Not again.

Another grandmother, another killing.

As we await the West Bloomfield grandmother accused of killing her grandson, Sandra Layne, to return to court for trial. It's pretty clear, I think, that he shot her, but the question for the jury is what her intention was. Was she afraid of a troubled teenager? It promises to be a well-watched trial.

She returns to court for a pretrial, possibly scheduling, hearing. They've been waiting for forensic testing, which could check her mental health.

But now in Toledo, a grandmother appears to be the one blamed for the tragedy of a family killed, including three kids.

Oh, and just learned that Layne's hearing has again been adjourned. We will keep you up to date.

Wow. A 17-year-old is basically gutted, stabbed to death, on a West Bloomfield street.
West Bloomfield is a nice community, only a couple of other homicides in the past decade, one case involving domestic violence and the other still a mystery (a woman killed in her garage on Saturday morning).
Click here to read the story about the killing of Jonathan Rickman, 17.
It's a shocking crime due to the violence and the scene, a quiet neighborhood street. But it also is shocking because police say a 15-year-old acquaintance of the victim is the suspect.
What is surprising to me is the extent that leaders in Oakland County are going to protect the accused. The young man is charged with open murder.
I know everyone is presumed innocent, but we live in an open society and we are allowed to know what the state is doing. When the juvenile court referee (essentially, a judge) David Barnes ordered reporters to not name the accused, otherwise barring them from the open courtroom, that seemed to reach too far in protecting the accused killer.
I know the referee can bar photographers, so in allowing them in, he can ask or demand that they not photograph the accused; that's fair, because the camera does not have a right to be in the courtroom (yet!, but that's a different beef).
We can debate whether the prosecutor's office is soft on crime or appropriately sensitive in not charging the youth as an adult, instead leaving it up to a judge down the road. That's the right of the prosecutors in determining charges.
However, the entire handling of the case gives the appearance of caring more about the young man who, according to police, stabbed another human being to death. Used to be, we would see who the culprit was and we would be debating whether it was fair for a 14-, 15, or 16-year-old to face life-in-prison without parole, because they were charged as an adult.
And in Oakland County, traditionally the people, especially the voters, like the tough-on-crime model. We don't approve of stabbing people to death on our neighborhood streets.
Pictured: Referee David Barnes

I like today's Detroit Free Press editorial about the Farmington Hills murder case involving a lawyer whose death has been ruled an accident.

When murder charges were announced against Laura Lynn Johnson, 46, I wondered why the Oakland County Medical Examiner's Office refused to offer a cause and manner of death of her husband, Lloyd Johnson, 47. We were told they were both pending. But it's a murder, police and prosecutors believe.

Well, it's still a murder charge but not a homicide, the Medical Examiner's Office has ruled. The manner of death is accidental and, on top of that, poor health is a contributing factor, not mistreatment or abuse.

Accidents can still be manslaughters, but now that they've gone down the path of second-degree murder, it seems the case against Laura Johnson is over.

Of course, we don't know yet because police and prosecutors won't answer questions about the case. They'll charge murder, but they hide behind the 'ongoing investigation' and feeling they are prevented from saying anything further.

It seems the problem with this case is the secrecy and lack of facts offered to the public. A murder charge is serious business and is noted within the community. They cannot order us from asking about the case and they cannot order you from wondering about what is happening or reading about it.

I've long felt that Prosecutor Jessica Cooper ordering her attorneys to not discuss their cases with reporters is a sign of lack of trust of her staff and even her office. I covered the county courthouse for four years and came to believe the attorneys within the prosecutor's office to be trustworthy, highly skilled, knowledgeable, and very reasonable. Telling them they cannot explain their cases and the law creates a needless barrier in knowing and understanding what is happening and why.

Meanwhile, in Hazel Park, a man was killed after a fight and the death has been ruled a homicide, even though the fighter may have not intended to kill the victim, it could still be murder, or manslaughter, or just assault. It could be that no crime was committed. But here's a case that could be charged murder, because it is a homicide.

Wow. Tragic story 0ur of West Bloomfield, with a husband now a suspect in his wife's death. First, it's a unique story in how it came about - a tip from hospital where the man was a patient. Injured himself, he says there's someone else hurt at home. She's dead.

Now it appears he was living the good life, but based on his being sued by a bank and recently sued for divorce, it was not so good. The videos he made promoting a stay-at-home, don't-really-work, make-tons-o-money from doing something we don't need to bother getting specific about lifestyle show the cracks in the foundation.

Again, wow. You can go to youtube and hear him offer this up himself, in his own voice. About 300 people had watched the videos, or a couple people a hundred and so times. That's bound to go up.

What amazes me is that I've been right on one of the Hawaiian beaches he was one, promoting the good life. Of course, my internet business - as online editor - doesn't pay enough for the good life so I was there for only a week, and I stayed with family for free.

Such a shame for the rest of the family.

After a recent wave of attacks on schools and school children, a Chinese news agency reported today about an attack on a court and its judges.

Well, at least the violence is moving out of the schools.

However, I don't want to be too light about violence. The story does indicate something that is very American, the dangers during the destruction of the marriage. Apparently, this guy went to the court to avenge a wrong committed by the courts in handling his divorce three years earlier.

Same thing in the US, I'm afraid. They worry about security during murder trials or for jurors, but it's really the family courts that have to be careful. Domestic violence can leave the home and enter public places.

I'm used now to seeing strong sentences for drunken drivers who kill. The days of short jail terms or even two years sentences are over for the worst drunken driving cases.

Today, Frances Dingle of Macomb County, a 48-year-old woman, was sentenced to 22.5 to 25 years in prison for four counts of second-degree murder. She was drunk when her van slammed into a carload of teenagers in 2009.

But I wonder about the sentence. There's a two-thirds rule that requires the bottom part (minimum term) be no more than 2/3s of the maximum term. For instance, for a 15-year manslaughter charge, the highest possible sentence is 10-to-15 years. The idea is that the prison system needs some kind of incentive to keep prisoners in line.

But in many cases there are specifics that dictate the sentences being altered or adjusted, such as prior felonies making one a habitual offender.

I don't know what happened with this case to make have that odd sentence. I mean, one could argue that a defendant with a 22.5 to 25 year sentence could just be as unruly as possible, knowing that they only have to serve 2.5 years on their bottom term, especially because they may feel like parole is not likely the first time around.

Anyone have any thoughts?

Ok, I paid $2.85 this morning, not quite filling up in Rochester Hills. A nice family owns the station and I like to go there and say good morning. Same people have been there ever since I moved into the area.

Driving to the office, I passed stations in Pontiac that were on Perry Street, selling first for $2.57 and then $2.55. Wow, big difference, I think.

Then I realize we're approaching the five-year anniversary of the murder of David Bingham, a father of two who was shot to death after surrendering his vehicle to a pair of teenage carjackers at a Perry Street gas station. The victim, I recall, had done everything right when confronted by the teens, who took his truck, drove around the block and then returned to eliminate the witness to their crime.

They were none too bright, being caught a short while later by patrolling officers. They had the man's property on them, I recall.

Christopher Eugene Jackson is 22 and has served five years of a life term. He'll never get out, as far as the law is concerned now. And though he was younger than 18 when he shot Bingham to death, the recent Supreme Court decision will not help him. (He killed someone, and the US's top court ruled life without parole was unfair for teenagers who had not killed.)

I covered the trial of one teenager (the other one pleaded to a lesser charge and testified) and it was horrific, hearing the shooting as Mr. Bingham talked to a 9-1-1 operator and then watching the video from the station's surveillance tapes.

I'm guessing this can influence why gas is cheaper in some areas.

During the sentencing, Jackson walked out of court, saying, "I'm going to bounce back." He's a level four (the second highest level) prisoner in Manistee County. He was absolutely horrible in court, defiant and disrespectful to the judge, attorneys and victim's family. For no real reason, he shot a man who was filling up on his way to work, on the morning after the July 4th holiday in 2005.

I'll pay the extra $3 or $4.

The comments on the story about a Pontiac mother who killed her baby and was found not guilty by reason of insanity are interesting.
They are much more than the typical hating on Pontiac that goes on or the typical anti-crime rhetoric. They involve people who know the woman or the case.
It's good to see a story expanding outward with a real conversation. Please, note, I'm sure not all the comments are made in the spirit of adding to the story.

Wow.

Lots of crazy crimes today, including a young man who attacked father with sword, a teenager from Pontiac convicted of first-degree murder who can only flip of the camera to show his true character, and a couple caught trying to fraudulently open a bank account.

The couple was the worst, if the allegations are true, because their crime was relatively minor, but they failed to mention to cops that their 16-month-old baby was at home alone.

For 24 hours, this child waited with only an apple next to him in the crib.

That one is the most shocking.

I can't even imagine the fear this child felt. And if all they had to do was say, my child is alone at home, they would be in one tenth of the trouble they are in now. Selfish or just scared, talk about digging your own hole.