How Did These Savages Get Away With Murder?

ToraToraTora | 11:38 Wed 04th Mar 2015 | News

12 Answers

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-31730542

Are These Innocent Civilians?

Another Menace In The Countryside?

Answers

1 to 12 of 12

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by ToraToraTora. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.

jim360

Goodness only knows, but a 31-hour deliberation and still only a majority verdict implies either that there is a lot more to the case than as couple of paragraphs on BBC News, or that there were some members of the jury who were just bloody-minded.

jno

presumably the jury - after 31 hours - conluded there was no intent to kill?This isn't unheard of, I suppose, though on the basis of a 100-word report they look as if they were lucky..

Cloverjo

As horrendous as it is, I suppose the jury concluded that the two women didn't plan to kill the girl.

ToraToraTora

Question Author

50 injuries? right oh!

Gromit

I'm guessing the medical evidence could not prove that her death was deliberate. There was clearly an intent at maltreatment, but they probably didn't mean to kill her.
The Jury heard all the evidence, and we do not know any of it. So unless the juryy were all idiots, the likelihood is that this was the right conviction, even though a little girl died.

ToraToraTora

Question Author

So they really wanted to keep her alive for more torture, that's ok then! We really need to have something in between manslaugher and murder, possibly along the lines of the US system Murder-1/2 etc

sp1814

TTT

In cases like these, it would be really helpful if the report actually said why a manslaughter charge was brought back by the jury.

As it stands, looking at your link, the first question I ask myself is, "Exactly what would they have needed to do for it to be murder?"

Orderlimit

Don't forget the intent for murder is the intention to kill OR cause grievous bodily harm (GBH)

Cathyhuns

Because in English law, the prosecution have to prove the case "beyond all reasonable doubt". If there is any doubt, or there isn't the evidence to prove that those individuals were responsible, then the verdict is not guilty. Unlike other countries, people in England cannot be found legallyguilty by association or by the media - and long may that continue.