ChatterBank5 mins ago
3 years for murder!
23 Answers
A man told his wife he was leaving her to live in Canada with another woman so she stabbed him with a pair of scissors. Is this justice?
I can't do the cut and pastey thing!
Could someone please oblige. :-)
I can't do the cut and pastey thing!
Could someone please oblige. :-)
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by 123everton. 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.
Murder usually means a premeditated plan to kill someone. If it is not premeditated they normally charge you with manslaughter.
I have not seen the trial details so we dont know what happened, but it may be she had not plans to kill her husband and it was done in the heat of the moment.
Maybe he came home, said he was leaving her, it developed into an argument, maybe he threatened her (we dont know) and she picked up a knife to protect herself and he was stabed in the ensuing fight.
So first off it may not have been murder but manslaughter, and secondly as we dont know the trial details we cannot say if 3 years is right or not.
It is very easy to just look at the headline and say "3 years for murder how terrible"
I have not seen the trial details so we dont know what happened, but it may be she had not plans to kill her husband and it was done in the heat of the moment.
Maybe he came home, said he was leaving her, it developed into an argument, maybe he threatened her (we dont know) and she picked up a knife to protect herself and he was stabed in the ensuing fight.
So first off it may not have been murder but manslaughter, and secondly as we dont know the trial details we cannot say if 3 years is right or not.
It is very easy to just look at the headline and say "3 years for murder how terrible"
An example of how easy it is to jump to conclusions. I was watching one of those "real life" movies the other day about a rape trial.
During the trial it came out that the defence lawyer had been charged with rape many years ago. This was brought up by the prosecution to discredit him.
This makes him sound awful.
But it turns out that in fact he was 17 and so was his girlfriend and they were having sex. In some US states you can be chraged with "statutory rape" if a girl is under 18, even if she is giving her consent.
Turns out that in the end they got maried and had 3 children and were still happily married.
So it is worth knowing all the facts before jumping to conclusions.
During the trial it came out that the defence lawyer had been charged with rape many years ago. This was brought up by the prosecution to discredit him.
This makes him sound awful.
But it turns out that in fact he was 17 and so was his girlfriend and they were having sex. In some US states you can be chraged with "statutory rape" if a girl is under 18, even if she is giving her consent.
Turns out that in the end they got maried and had 3 children and were still happily married.
So it is worth knowing all the facts before jumping to conclusions.
B.B.C. North West Ceefax page 168.
"A woman killed her former partner by stabbing him in the heart has been jailed for 3 years 4 months.
P.C David Smith, 35, who was based at R.A.F. Menwith Hill in North Yorkshire was stabbed at a house in Barnoldswick, Lancashire, last September.
At an earlier hearing Susan Phillipson admitted killing Mr. Smith.
Phillipson who denied murder but admitted manslaughter was sentenced at Preston Crown Court."
You stab me (or anyone I know or care about) through the heart because they're dumping you then it's murder, she had no choice but to make a plea.
An applalling judgement in my book.
"A woman killed her former partner by stabbing him in the heart has been jailed for 3 years 4 months.
P.C David Smith, 35, who was based at R.A.F. Menwith Hill in North Yorkshire was stabbed at a house in Barnoldswick, Lancashire, last September.
At an earlier hearing Susan Phillipson admitted killing Mr. Smith.
Phillipson who denied murder but admitted manslaughter was sentenced at Preston Crown Court."
You stab me (or anyone I know or care about) through the heart because they're dumping you then it's murder, she had no choice but to make a plea.
An applalling judgement in my book.
If it had been the other way round (the husband stabbing his wife) he would have most likely have been given a much longer sentence,
Once again a case of double standards, for example,. In a recent episode of the TV soap Emmerdale, one of the female characters gave a male character an almighty punch in he face. This seems perfectly acceptable but had the roles been reversed and he TV companies swttch board would have gone into melt-down.
I know this is only fiction, but it does happen in real life.
Once again a case of double standards, for example,. In a recent episode of the TV soap Emmerdale, one of the female characters gave a male character an almighty punch in he face. This seems perfectly acceptable but had the roles been reversed and he TV companies swttch board would have gone into melt-down.
I know this is only fiction, but it does happen in real life.
It's not double standards because many crimes are seen as aggrevated when the victim is thought of as vulnerable.
That's why if a great big bloke murders his wife it's seen as a worse crime than if a small woman kills her husband.
There is logic there, you may not agree with it (I'm not quite sure that I do) but it is there.
That's why if a great big bloke murders his wife it's seen as a worse crime than if a small woman kills her husband.
There is logic there, you may not agree with it (I'm not quite sure that I do) but it is there.
JTP I said quite clearly in my post answer that if you stab someone through the heart to my mind it's murder, she had to take the plea as it was blatantly obvious she did it.
She stabbed him because he was leaving her, it is a double standard the sentence almost certainly would be stiffer if a quiet and passive man responded in a similarly violent way if his partner was leaving him.
I defy anyone to take the Pepsi challenge on this, if that was your brother, your son who'd been killed would you accept that sentence as just?
If you stand to lose alot of money in a divorce you may as well kill them, if you stood to lose �100,000 and served 3 years that's �33,000 you'd earn.
There's no justice in this.
She stabbed him because he was leaving her, it is a double standard the sentence almost certainly would be stiffer if a quiet and passive man responded in a similarly violent way if his partner was leaving him.
I defy anyone to take the Pepsi challenge on this, if that was your brother, your son who'd been killed would you accept that sentence as just?
If you stand to lose alot of money in a divorce you may as well kill them, if you stood to lose �100,000 and served 3 years that's �33,000 you'd earn.
There's no justice in this.
123everton,
Do you understand what manslaughter is? Do you understand how it differs from murder?
Do you understand the difference between involuntary manslaughter and voluntary manslaughter? Do you understand which defences fall under voluntary manslaughter?
Assuming that you do, do you think that the sentence for manslaughter should be the same as for murder? If so, why?
Do you understand what manslaughter is? Do you understand how it differs from murder?
Do you understand the difference between involuntary manslaughter and voluntary manslaughter? Do you understand which defences fall under voluntary manslaughter?
Assuming that you do, do you think that the sentence for manslaughter should be the same as for murder? If so, why?
She stabbed him through the heart, to my mind the plea should've been rejected and a jury trial ordered.
If it was your relative in the ground, would you view that sentence as justice?
I certainly would'nt, an old colleague of mine was "manslaughtered" he's just as dead as if he'd been murdered. His killer laughed about it afterwards.
Victims command justice.
If it was your relative in the ground, would you view that sentence as justice?
I certainly would'nt, an old colleague of mine was "manslaughtered" he's just as dead as if he'd been murdered. His killer laughed about it afterwards.
Victims command justice.
So you'd abolish manslaughter on the grounds that the result (death) is the same as murder? All manslaughter? Or just the ones you struggle to get your head round?
We're coming at it from different angles though. The same old line is often trotted out - 'if it was your daughter/sister/mother, how would you feel?'
I'd be in a blind rage and rational thought would go out of the window. Thankfully, we don't use that as the basis of law making, or the criminal justice system would be a blood bath.
We're coming at it from different angles though. The same old line is often trotted out - 'if it was your daughter/sister/mother, how would you feel?'
I'd be in a blind rage and rational thought would go out of the window. Thankfully, we don't use that as the basis of law making, or the criminal justice system would be a blood bath.
Putting word's in my mouth there Quinlad.
In this case the plea should've been rejected, he was leaving her he told her to his face he was going (like a man ought to) and she stabbed him through the heart.
I can think of cases were manslaughter applies (2 blokes duking it out in the street etc) this to my mind is'nt one of them, and either way 3 years is nowhere near long enough, she'll be out by next Christmas.
In this case the plea should've been rejected, he was leaving her he told her to his face he was going (like a man ought to) and she stabbed him through the heart.
I can think of cases were manslaughter applies (2 blokes duking it out in the street etc) this to my mind is'nt one of them, and either way 3 years is nowhere near long enough, she'll be out by next Christmas.
You're right. And it would actually save a lot of time and effort if judges disregarded the stacks of evidence, psychiatric reports, police statements and witness testimony they were given and made a decision based on B.B.C. North West Ceefax.
Some reading you might be interested in:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manslaughter#Volu ntary_manslaughter
Some reading you might be interested in:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manslaughter#Volu ntary_manslaughter
Ah! Psychiatry the science of opinion.
I tend not to bother with wikipedia as it can often be wrong (Mike Catt(?) composer) and to be blatantly honest I can't be ar5ed looking! But thanks anyway, justice can only be considered justice if you'd be content with the ruling yourself.
That sentence (regardless of any mitigating circumstances) is far too lenient.
Or do you disagree?
I tend not to bother with wikipedia as it can often be wrong (Mike Catt(?) composer) and to be blatantly honest I can't be ar5ed looking! But thanks anyway, justice can only be considered justice if you'd be content with the ruling yourself.
That sentence (regardless of any mitigating circumstances) is far too lenient.
Or do you disagree?
Funnily enough, I neither agree nor disagree. Given that I know next to nothing about the case (same as you), I'll give the judge the benefit of the doubt.
I don't have blind faith in the British justice system but I am fairly satisfied that the judge will have based his sentence on legislation that's been democratically installed and on a hefty amount of evidence. Rather than 100 words on Teletext.
I don't tend to read a brief news item and then assume that I'm right and the judge is wrong and then bleat about it on the internet.
But if you disagree that manslaughter should even exist in law, we're in different ballparks from the off.
I don't have blind faith in the British justice system but I am fairly satisfied that the judge will have based his sentence on legislation that's been democratically installed and on a hefty amount of evidence. Rather than 100 words on Teletext.
I don't tend to read a brief news item and then assume that I'm right and the judge is wrong and then bleat about it on the internet.
But if you disagree that manslaughter should even exist in law, we're in different ballparks from the off.
I dunno which thread you're reading here.
I've said manslaughter can exist in law (2 men duking it out in the street, remember?) he is dead, there was nothing in the item to suggest he was violent towards her either on the day in question or historically, she had no right to wield a knife and stab, she had as far as I can see no justification for doing so. She had to make the plea as it was a nailed on certainty that she did it, any court in the world would've convicted her of the killing based on the evidence, mitigation was the only defence open to her, and should've been tried in a court with a charge of murder. TO MY MIND A JURY SHOULD'VE HAVE DECIDED THE VERDICT DEMOCRATICALLY.
And as for bleating on this website, that accounts for about 90% of it's content.
I've said manslaughter can exist in law (2 men duking it out in the street, remember?) he is dead, there was nothing in the item to suggest he was violent towards her either on the day in question or historically, she had no right to wield a knife and stab, she had as far as I can see no justification for doing so. She had to make the plea as it was a nailed on certainty that she did it, any court in the world would've convicted her of the killing based on the evidence, mitigation was the only defence open to her, and should've been tried in a court with a charge of murder. TO MY MIND A JURY SHOULD'VE HAVE DECIDED THE VERDICT DEMOCRATICALLY.
And as for bleating on this website, that accounts for about 90% of it's content.
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles14 mins ago
Music14 mins ago
Climate Change Robs Family Of Life...
ChatterBank20 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles22 mins ago
Star Wars Quix...f A O Mozz....
Film, Media & TV27 mins ago
