Ipswich Murders

[Eve]

Just been watching the CCTV footage of that poor girl before she died and them saying she was pregnant as well.

I know there are far wider issues to the debate, this question is in relation to the murder of a pregnant woman and not the law in relation to abortion, but what does everyone think as to whether the punishment awarded when they find the evil *******(s) taking the lives of these women should also represent the death caused to the child as the current law does not recognise the life of a child until it draws it first breath.

[Eve]

I'm not a criminal lawyer though Wardy :) I meant there can't be a murder or manslaughter charge in respect of the unborn baby as infanticide is not recognised until a child has drawn its first breath.

[##Wardy##]

There is a very good law in place. It is there for the reason that abortion is legal in the country.

[-Zorro-]

I think they should hang him anyway...and you can only hang him once

[##Wardy##]

Wasn't Oliver Cromwell hung twice??

[Eve]

I know but am trying to steer the debate away from abortion and more towards thoughts of punishment for those who kill a woman who is carrying a child, not with the wilful act and intention in child destruction.

[-Zorro-]

Did it not work 1st time or was he sentenced to be hung twice

[Eve]

I though he died of malaria or similar then was hung posthumously or am i thinking of someone else?

[-Zorro-]

Apparently his corpse was dug up, hung, then beheaded.

[##Wardy##]

Jenna, I disagree with you. If their is no intent to kill the unborn child then this will open up a can of worms and give the woman (or more the unborn child) rights not conducive with fairness.

For example if the murderer is tried for the killing of the unborn child (with no specific malice aforethought towards that child) it will make a mockery of our current murder laws.

Also where will the ball stop? Say for example I drive dangerously causing only injury to a woman but forcing the miscarriage of her baby. Should I be tried for death by dangerous? I agree with the current law and say no. Whilst heartbreaking and perhaps wrong, it will be a a legal minefield.

Or, another example, I use reasonable force on a woman to defend myself and punch her in the stomach. Unaware she is up the duff I kill her baby. That is not reasonable, but should I really be tried for murder? No way.

As sad as it is, an unborn child should remain lifeless (legally, that is) until he or she draws its first breath.

This has caused my Christian beliefs to be questioned as I am strongly for "pro-choice" and see nothing wrong with abortion (even later than the 24 weeks (?).

A baby is a poo machine with jammy fingers and dribbling attributes, NOT a fetus curled up in a mothers womb waiting for the discovery of life. Be that life, Gods will or natural selection.

[~max~]

No, this shouln't be considered when this person goes to trial.
I totally agree, that if this woman was 3 months pregnant, thus making you think she was probably intending to keep the baby, you'd be inclined to think it a double murder, but I think it would lead to too much confusion, legally. Causing a precedent is a very delicate matter. As WM said, what if you accidentaly caused a woman to miscarry, obviously not knowing she was pregnant? you would be tried for murder then...

It's a very complicated and sensitive issue. All I can say is, I hope this psycho is caught soon, and tried for his crimes. God bless the victims.

[shivvy]

If it were YOUR wife that were pregnant when raped and she subsequently lost the baby, who else would you blame?
Would you presume that she might have miscarried whether she had been raped or not?

[##Wardy##]

shivvy, law is objective. If MY wife was even spat at by a man, let alone raped, I would want the yob tortured and eventually killed with a blow torch and acid.