In a recent segment, John Oliver shed light on the contentious application of felony murder charges in the United States. He wants to change the narrative within public support of these laws to focus on how they tend to imprison people that had no hand in a murder. The problem is especially acute with young arrestees, the average age of most charged being in their teens or early twenties.
With felony murder laws, you can be convicted in shockingly expansive circumstances. People can be held criminally liable just for being there when a drug-related overdose occurs. This can occur even when they were not directly involved in the execution of the death in the first place. This overly expansionary application is problematic enough in terms of fairness and justice alone, but considering the disproportionate impact on non-white individuals, it is particularly troubling. Here in New York, the research paints a concerning picture. Non-fundamental accomplices who did not personally commit murder are 34 times more likely to be Black.
Oliver stressed the historical context of felony murder. He noted that this idea originated in England, but was later abolished there. More importantly, he shined a light on an alarming reality—since 1985, 11 people have been executed for felony murder. This is an alarming statistic that we cannot ignore. He had an incisive critique of the legal landscape. He contended that we obviously shouldn’t be executing murderers who didn’t commit murder at all.
The comedian went on to explain that felony murder laws are more straightforward to use than regular first-degree murder laws. He has likened these laws to the vast array of Apple TV shows—present in abundance yet largely unknown to the public: “Think of felony murder laws like Apple TV shows. Sure, there are hundreds of them but the average person has zero freaking clue that any of them might even be usable.
Oliver’s critique extends lay beyond the legal implications. In doing so, he expressed his broader frustration over how society views the youth at the center of these cases. He added, “Usually when people are made to pick the second worst alternative, they wind up with lunch at a Cracker Barrel.” He underscored that society instead tends to trap young people in tiresome experiences rather than allowing them to incur real consequences such as felony murder.
In his closing statement, Oliver reiterated the need for strong penalties for felonies. He argued that those consequences had to be proportional to the crime. Here are the salient points from his statement. No one thinks felons should get off scot-free. He pushed for a system of accountability when a person’s life is lost and such offenders should be punished for their crimes accordingly. He proposed a straightforward solution: “the solution is actually pretty simple: just get rid of the felony murder charge.”
The ongoing debate surrounding felony murder charges raises critical questions about justice, equity, and the treatment of young offenders within the American legal system.