Crosswords1 min ago
Lucky To Get Away With Manslaughter.
Answers
1 to 14 of 14
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Jackdaw33. 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.
I believe that murder is not an appropriate charge, if the death was not inflicted deliberately - as in this case.
These women are clearly mentally and socially inadequate, and were unable to deal with the circumstances that befell them, and the tragic members of their family.
I don't believe they are murderers, or indeed 'savages'.
It's easy to assume that because we take normal life and responsibility for granted, that everyone else does as well - and they don't, as this case shows.
These women are clearly mentally and socially inadequate, and were unable to deal with the circumstances that befell them, and the tragic members of their family.
I don't believe they are murderers, or indeed 'savages'.
It's easy to assume that because we take normal life and responsibility for granted, that everyone else does as well - and they don't, as this case shows.
Difficult - I've read not just the article linked to in the OP, but some of the defence submissions - which detail the (alleged?) attempts made by the two convicted women to care for the young man - and his (alleged?) refusal to accept any other intervention.
Even so, I'm far from convinced that manslaughter (as opposed to murder) is the correct decision.
To accept that they didn't understand the consequences of their actions is (essentially) saying that stupidity is a not just a mitigating factor, but a complete defence - which it shouldn't be.
I'm unhappy with the circular argument that says "No sane person of normal intelligence could have done this - therefore they are automatically allowed the defence of insanity or limited mental capacity" - it's just not right.
Even so, I'm far from convinced that manslaughter (as opposed to murder) is the correct decision.
To accept that they didn't understand the consequences of their actions is (essentially) saying that stupidity is a not just a mitigating factor, but a complete defence - which it shouldn't be.
I'm unhappy with the circular argument that says "No sane person of normal intelligence could have done this - therefore they are automatically allowed the defence of insanity or limited mental capacity" - it's just not right.
sunny dave - // To accept that they didn't understand the consequences of their actions is (essentially) saying that stupidity is a not just a mitigating factor, but a complete defence - which it shouldn't be. //
I think you have to be careful here not to confuse everyday speech expressions, with legally binding terminology.
I would suggest that the convicted couple did not avoid murder charges because they were 'stupid' - in my view, stupidity is the action of someone who is fully aware of what they are doing, but does not consider the consequences through simple lack of thought, which is not the same as being unable to consider the consequences.
I would also suggest that the couple have undergone appropriate psychiatric evaluations which have judged then as incapable of understanding the potential result of their behaviour - hence the charge or manslaughter, which involves an involuntary death, rather than murder, which involves an intended death.
// I'm unhappy with the circular argument that says "No sane person of normal intelligence could have done this - therefore they are automatically allowed the defence of insanity or limited mental capacity" - it's just not right. //
I would be too, if I believed it existed in law, which I do not believe it does.
The notion that 'no person of normal intelligence could have done this' is not one that is used to frame or enact the law.
Each case is assessed individually, and not on a blanket 'it can't be that, so it must be this' concept - that is not how the law works.
I think you have to be careful here not to confuse everyday speech expressions, with legally binding terminology.
I would suggest that the convicted couple did not avoid murder charges because they were 'stupid' - in my view, stupidity is the action of someone who is fully aware of what they are doing, but does not consider the consequences through simple lack of thought, which is not the same as being unable to consider the consequences.
I would also suggest that the couple have undergone appropriate psychiatric evaluations which have judged then as incapable of understanding the potential result of their behaviour - hence the charge or manslaughter, which involves an involuntary death, rather than murder, which involves an intended death.
// I'm unhappy with the circular argument that says "No sane person of normal intelligence could have done this - therefore they are automatically allowed the defence of insanity or limited mental capacity" - it's just not right. //
I would be too, if I believed it existed in law, which I do not believe it does.
The notion that 'no person of normal intelligence could have done this' is not one that is used to frame or enact the law.
Each case is assessed individually, and not on a blanket 'it can't be that, so it must be this' concept - that is not how the law works.
I don't think the sentence is going to make any difference to this debate.
The conviciton is for Manslaughter and the OP suggests that the convicted couple have been 'lucky to get away with it' - so their sentence is highly unlikely to prove satisfactory for him since it is not likely to be Life Imprisonment With No Parole, which, barring execution, appears to be the only sentence he feels is appropriate.
The conviciton is for Manslaughter and the OP suggests that the convicted couple have been 'lucky to get away with it' - so their sentence is highly unlikely to prove satisfactory for him since it is not likely to be Life Imprisonment With No Parole, which, barring execution, appears to be the only sentence he feels is appropriate.
1 to 14 of 14
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.