I believe this situation is really unique, although now unheard of completely. Police Officer Walter T. Barclay was shot while in the line of duty in 1966. He survived at the time. William Barnes was convicted of attempted homicide and was sentenced to 7 – 15 years in prison. Since then, it appears he has been in and out of prison. In fact, when he was arrested this week for the muder orf Officer Barclay, he was in a halfway house. Now, there is a real possibility that he will be tried for the murder of Officer Barclay, as the Medical Examner determined that Walter Barclay died from his injuries recieved in the shooting.
So, what do you think? Should he be prosecuted for a crime he has already spent time in prison for?
Death of Officer 40 Years After Shooting May Bring New Charges for Gunman
Death Notice
Philadelpia patrolman succumbs to gunshot wounds
Patrolman Walter T. Barclay Jr.
Officer dies from 40-year-old gunshot
Officer Dies 40 Years After Shooting
No he served his time and paid his debt to society. I think the double jeopardy rule should apply hear. The fact that this man passed away 40 yrs later then it shouldnt a murder charge. I think murder is when the person dies at the time of the crime or soon after.
By: amy07 on August 23, 2007
at 5:44 pm
No no no….he did die on that tragic day in 1966…he lost everything, his career, chance to get married and have children, and all the things you and I take for granted including being able to WALK!!!! Double jeopardy does not apply here. William Barnes got to serve a few years for attempted murder and seemed to go on enjoying life with no remorse based on his comments to a newspaper although he was in and out of prison even up to now at age 71!! 71 – an age Mr. Barclay didn’t reach. He lived to be 64 years of age of which 41 years were spent in hell. Barnes needs to face justice in our court system. If he is not tried in court, he will have to face the ultimate Judge – God.
By: Mark on August 24, 2007
at 8:57 am
I do not think for a minute he should be charged now. It would be double jeopardy and from what I know, the court can’t do that. This man is 71 years old now. Does he have a family, grandchildren? He served his time. There’s no point in putting this man behind bars for the rest of his life.
By: Melissa on August 24, 2007
at 11:00 am
Seemy response at:
http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/highered/
By: castagnera on September 8, 2007
at 7:02 am
[...] and when he was arrested for murder of the same individual because of the subsequent death in 2007, he was picked up from a half way house on his way out of the penal [...]
By: Spirit of the Law vs. Letter of the Law « Musings of a Homeschool Father on March 6, 2008
at 12:20 am
I am surprised that the defense has not sought a writ of prohibition to stop the proceedings. The prosection fails the test in Grady v Corbin enuciated by the US Supreme Court
The Double Jeopardy Clause bars a subsequent prosecution if, to establish an essential element of an offense charged in that prosecution, the government will prove conduct that constitutes an offense for which the defendant has already been prosecuted
To proceed with the case, the prosection must rely on a not well tested footnote in the ruling which states
“[a]n exception may exist where the State is unable to proceed on the more serious charge at the outset because the additional facts necessary to sustain that charge have not occurred or have not been discovered despite the exercise of due diligence. See Diaz v. United States, 223 U.S. 442, 448 -449 (1912)
The operative word here is MAY
By: Allan on March 17, 2008
at 7:43 pm
Yes, Mr Barnes has a family, as a matter of fact a loving family that wants to enjoy his company once again. He is a victim of the Judicial System. There is no doubt in my mind that he is being charged for murder because Mr. Barclay was Philadelphia Police Officer. This is not fair, and I think that Mrs Lynn Abraham should be spending our tax dollars on the violence that has touched our city. I am Mr. Barnes niece and i see first hand what this case is costing us tax payers, with each the side spending a substantial amount of money to hire the very best Medical experts. I hope that my uncle Bill comes out of this whole mess a free man, and lives to 110 years old. He deserves to be free.
Diane Barnes
PRNCSS1164@AOL.COM (EMAIL ADDRESS)
By: Diane Barnes on April 15, 2008
at 6:23 pm
Diane,
What about the victim, Mr. Barclay? Does he not deserve justice too? You never even mentioned him once. Not any compassion for the victim of the crime, only for the perpetrator, who KNEW that this could happen, as it does happen all the time.
By: mylifeofcrime on April 15, 2008
at 7:26 pm
If the victim died of natural causes, such as a heart attack, then I would agree that the case has no merit. However, the victim’s death was not natural and therefore defined as a homicide. What message do we send to our society by not prosecuting the case because the subject is too old, because the subject served time for a previous related offense, or because we do not want to waste the time effort or money? How do you tell the victim’s family such details and do they not deserve justice for their personal loss? Again, I base my position on the results of the coroner’s examination – “homicide stemming from complications from the shooting.” If we let him go we (the justice system) let a murderer go, and if he goes out and kills again who do we place the blame on then?
Let me ask this: The situation: A five year old girl is reported missing from a department store. After days of exhausting search and questions and pleas for help a man comes forward with the girls cloths and admits he took her and she is fine. The man is charged with kidnapping and serves ten years in prison. Fifteen years later the girls body is found and evidence shows she was severely abused and dismembered. Evidence links the original subject to the murder. Do you charge him?
By: alan2you on April 16, 2008
at 4:16 am
I will say to you that i was at the preliminary hearing, and the coroner’s ruling of the cause of death was first ruled to be natural causes. It was not until he spoke with the Philadelphia’s coroner that it was revealed that he was a Philadelphia Police Officer, and at that time the cause of death was changed to usepeslis. Also are you aware of the fact that Mr. Barclay suffered two major car accidents one of which damaged his spine. He also fell out of his wheel chair and suffered addtional damage to his spine. These accidents are where the unbroken chain of events breaks. My thoughts are with the Barclay’s Family, it is a very tragic ending to a Police Officers Life, but Mr Barnes served his time for the shooting, and should not be held accountable now for his death. Too many things happen in 41 years, not to mention that we grow older, our bodies just don’t stay as health as they do when we are younger. He smoked cigarettes, drank alcohol, and was also very depressed. Did he take his medicine like he was suppose to? Both families are suffering, but the unfair thing to do is to charge Mr Barnes with his murder 41 years later.
I guess that we should charge the young man in grade school that punched me in my head 15 years ago. I suffer today with very bad migrane headaches, maybe he is to blame for these headaches, and should be arrested and charged too.
To answer the question about the 5 year old girl, i don’t quite understand your question, in one statement you said the girl is found and is fine. Then you say she was found 15 years later dismembered and abused. I don’t think that abuse would be visable 15 years later, and if he kills her and dismembers her body, than yes he should be charged with murder because he just murdered her. This case is not like Mr. Barnes case, not even close.
Diane
By: Diane Barnes on May 3, 2008
at 7:15 pm
Nice reply. I could have clarified my 5 year old girl story better I agree, but that is a mute issue at this point. However, you brought out information I did not find on the web, which was brought out in court where the case in my opinion was properly addressed. If there are extenuating circumstances such as you stated then let the jury do their job and find in favor of the defendant. However, my point was based on what I found on the web and simply that justice should be followed and not ignored because of the case being too old or too costly etc… thank you for the additional information.
V/r
K
By: alan2you on June 12, 2008
at 3:52 am
I agree completely with Mrs. Barnes. This man has served his time, and should not be charged any further. I just read an article about this in People magazine and was disgusted that this man served his time and is now back in prison for a possible murder charge based on a police officer dying 41 years later from a urinary infection. Clearly this is a case of vengence and holding policemen to a different level than the rest of society. Before anyone sais anything, my brother is a cop, and I have every right to say that his life and any other cops life should not be held any higher than anyone else’s in society. Either the rules apply to all or to none. They choose their career path, and it doesn’t entitle them to special treatment.
I hope that the Barne’s family is able to sue the city. Mr. Barnes clearly made some poor choices throughout his life, but I truly feel that one, he served his time and paid his debt to society.
I also have compassion for the Barclay family, but Mr. Barclay also had additional mishaps throughout his life as stated earlier. However, Barnes served his time on what the justice system felt was a fair sentence. He shouldn’t be charged again.
By: Jeff Elkins on October 1, 2008
at 10:19 am
um… the corner ruled that he died of a urinary tract infection…how are the 2 related… he didnt shoot him in the UT. this case is rediculous
By: Bradley on October 7, 2008
at 12:06 am
Bradley,
You will want to go over his entire medical history to get that answer. And of course it is possible, even probable. I have seen a similar situation here where I live. You certainly don’t think that someone who is shot will always just heal right up, do you?
By: mylifeofcrime on October 7, 2008
at 5:15 am
William barnes is not guilty ,Barcley was workin ,drivin ,for yrs after the situation. Urinary tract inffection can be cause from anything an u can say that cause girls get them a lot an they aren’t being shot to get them. Barcley was also in a couple car accidents during the yrs so there is no way that u could say that caused it . The only reason they want to charge him is bacause its a cop if it was some random person goin to th district attorney she would laugh in there face but since its a cop she feels as tho she got to make a potnt . NewYork had the same case an threw it out that should tell u something
By: roosevelt on October 14, 2009
at 8:46 am