How Long Before This Gets Watered Down To Manslaughter?

[ToraToraTora]

http://news.sky.com/story/man-killed-by-thieves-who-stole-his-car-in-manchester-10847902
Bloke works hard to get a decent car and these thieving lowlife vermin murder him trying to steal it. Absolute tragedy, throw away the key if you ask me. These savages should never see the light of day again. No doubt some soft judge will let them off with couple of years. Madness

[mikey4444]

Its not clear what happened TTT, but it might very well get tried as manslaughter, if it can't be shown that death was intended.

Perhaps NJ could give a judgement here. By the way I am as angry about this as you are.

[ToraToraTora]

well they are at least currently calling it a murder enquiry.

[Mamyalynne]

I can't answer your heading question.

What hateful people and so tragic an outcome.

[Islay]

Well given a recent high profile case and if this follows suit then this will be 'watered down' to manslaughter.

[ummmm]

Doesn't it always start off as a murder inquiry until some more facts have been established?

[emmie]

it seems to be murder, of course it makes you angry if they get a manslaughter charge, if caught that is.

[EDDIE51]

If the circumstances do not fit Murder it will have to be charged as manslaughter. If they were charged with murder and the case failed to be proved , as seems highly possible, the case would have to be dropped and a 'Not Guilty' verdict recorded. This would mean they get away free as they could never be charged again with the same offence.
Remember the maximum sentence for manslaughter is 'Life' just as for murder!
I have just read the story and it looks impossible to be murder!
To be murder the assailants MUST have been intending to kill him, which is fairly obviously not the case, also they would have to PROVE which of them was driving the car , which with the only witness dead may be difficult.

[ToraToraTora]

I take the point it probably will be argued that they did not intend death, at least from the outset but if they drove over him because he was in the way I think that would certainly lean towards murder.

[Islay]

Perhaps they had a mental illness

[Jackdaw33]

Point of law Eddie. For a conviction for murder there must be proved an intention to kill OR an intention to cause GBH. As NJ or indeed any law undergraduate will tell you, the legal definition of intention is much wider than the layman's.

[ToraToraTora]

islay: "Perhaps they had a mental illness " the other day you were surprised when we didn't think you were a conservative. this is the sort of answer that gives that impression. You prefer to make excuses for criminal scum above all else. They are car thieves and this one went wrong, end of.

[Islay]

Oh silly me you rejoice when one thug who murders in cold blood is let off because of apparent mental illness because he is a soldier! But demand blood for these ones! Wonder what party you will vote for!

[Zacs-Master]

Yeah bang on Tora, end of. Innit. Bish bash bosh. Lavverly.

[jno]

perhaps the charge will have to wait till they catch someone?

[ToraToraTora]

Islay, they killed a bloke with his own car trying to steal it. That means they went to steal it, that means they thought about it. They are not mentally ill they are bad people. When they get these lowlives I'll bet a pound to a penny they've got form and they probably should have been in jail anyway.

[Islay]

And the soldier knew it was wrong to shoot his enemy - your point is?

[mikey4444]

I think Eddie has it right here.....it would be difficult bring a charge of murder, so if a manslaughter charge isn't used instead, then they will get off scot free

[ToraToraTora]

if you want to talk about another case start your own thread, do not derail this one with irrelevance.

[Islay]

Lol good way to side swipe my valid points!!

[sp1814]

TTT

I read Islay's comment at 15:51 as being sarcastic.

Islay - was it?