Why isn't this murder?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-21628248
She and her boyfriend thought he'd insulted her, so they proceeded to stab him. Is it something to do with intent (i.e. proven intent was to maim and not kill?) I'd have thought common sense would still call that murder, but perhaps not?
She and her boyfriend thought he'd insulted her, so they proceeded to stab him. Is it something to do with intent (i.e. proven intent was to maim and not kill?) I'd have thought common sense would still call that murder, but perhaps not?
Original post by MattKneale
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-21628248
She and her boyfriend thought he'd insulted her, so they proceeded to stab him. Is it something to do with intent (i.e. proven intent was to maim and not kill?) I'd have thought common sense would still call that murder, but perhaps not?
She and her boyfriend thought he'd insulted her, so they proceeded to stab him. Is it something to do with intent (i.e. proven intent was to maim and not kill?) I'd have thought common sense would still call that murder, but perhaps not?
'A 14-year-old girl has been found guilty of arranging the killing' She didn't do the killing herself, so it's not murder.
The "excuses" for murder (I.E. voluntary manslaughter) are diminished responsibility and loss of control. Then you've got involuntary, with unlawful act manslaughter, reckless manslaughter and gross negligence manslaughter.
The jury may have pitied her some way, or been swayed by the testimoy of the defendant. We'll almost certainly never know.
The jury may have pitied her some way, or been swayed by the testimoy of the defendant. We'll almost certainly never know.
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by Rainbowcookie
'A 14-year-old girl has been found guilty of arranging the killing' She didn't do the killing herself, so it's not murder.
Original post by ChocoCoatedLemons
If she didn't actually do it
This is incorrect. You will see that both the girl and the person who actually stabbed the deceased were found guilty of manslaughter. Both parties were actually on trial for murder - even though the girl did not do any stabbing herself, she would be liable under the joint enterprise rules.
The reason why this jury convicted on manslaughter rather than murder is known only to the members of the jury. However, other reports on this case suggest that during the trial, there was evidence to suggest that the deceased was stabbed during a scuffle, with the male defendant saying that he: "instinctively stabbed Junior while they were scuffling."
Perhaps the jury were persuaded by this.
Original post by InnerTemple
This is incorrect. You will see that both the girl and the person who actually stabbed the deceased were found guilty of manslaughter. Both parties were actually on trial for murder - even though the girl did not do any stabbing herself, she would be liable under the joint enterprise rules.
The reason why this jury convicted on manslaughter rather than murder is known only to the members of the jury. However, other reports on this case suggest that during the trial, there was evidence to suggest that the deceased was stabbed during a scuffle, with the male defendant saying that he: "instinctively stabbed Junior while they were scuffling."
Perhaps the jury were persuaded by this.
The reason why this jury convicted on manslaughter rather than murder is known only to the members of the jury. However, other reports on this case suggest that during the trial, there was evidence to suggest that the deceased was stabbed during a scuffle, with the male defendant saying that he: "instinctively stabbed Junior while they were scuffling."
Perhaps the jury were persuaded by this.
Ah alright, I'll go change my post. I didn't actually read the article. I thought I'd heard that when I was on the news site I use, I must have been mistaken.
The jury could have been persuaded by that, it does seem possible. Of course, we'll almost certainly never know since that's kept confidential.
Original post by InnerTemple
This is incorrect. You will see that both the girl and the person who actually stabbed the deceased were found guilty of manslaughter. Both parties were actually on trial for murder - even though the girl did not do any stabbing herself, she would be liable under the joint enterprise rules.
The reason why this jury convicted on manslaughter rather than murder is known only to the members of the jury. However, other reports on this case suggest that during the trial, there was evidence to suggest that the deceased was stabbed during a scuffle, with the male defendant saying that he: "instinctively stabbed Junior while they were scuffling."
Perhaps the jury were persuaded by this.
The reason why this jury convicted on manslaughter rather than murder is known only to the members of the jury. However, other reports on this case suggest that during the trial, there was evidence to suggest that the deceased was stabbed during a scuffle, with the male defendant saying that he: "instinctively stabbed Junior while they were scuffling."
Perhaps the jury were persuaded by this.
Thanks!
what a horrible pair of people these are 
Original post by InnerTemple
This is incorrect. You will see that both the girl and the person who actually stabbed the deceased were found guilty of manslaughter. Both parties were actually on trial for murder - even though the girl did not do any stabbing herself, she would be liable under the joint enterprise rules.
The reason why this jury convicted on manslaughter rather than murder is known only to the members of the jury. However, other reports on this case suggest that during the trial, there was evidence to suggest that the deceased was stabbed during a scuffle, with the male defendant saying that he: "instinctively stabbed Junior while they were scuffling."
Perhaps the jury were persuaded by this.
The reason why this jury convicted on manslaughter rather than murder is known only to the members of the jury. However, other reports on this case suggest that during the trial, there was evidence to suggest that the deceased was stabbed during a scuffle, with the male defendant saying that he: "instinctively stabbed Junior while they were scuffling."
Perhaps the jury were persuaded by this.
Bit of an iffy one this.
What manslaughter direction could the judge have left to the jury?
It doesn't look like provocation or diminished responsibility.
I think all it could have been is that if the jury accepted that the defendants were party to an arrangement to stab the victim but that inflicting GBH went beyond the scope of the arrangement, then they could convict the defendants of manslaughter.
In which case the jury must be treated as having found that the defendants planned that he be stabbed gently.
I am not sure that I would have left manslaughter to the jury. I think I would have said murder or nothing.
Original post by Rainbowcookie
'A 14-year-old girl has been found guilty of arranging the killing' She didn't do the killing herself, so it's not murder.
As someone above said, you need to look up "joint enterprise", which essentially means that she would be considered equally guilty of the crime in question.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Man sentenced for 9 years after planning to assassinate the late queen in 2021
- Antifa activist murdered in NYC
- Terrorist NHS worker planned to bomb hospital
- Macbeth practice
- Green Party supporting Left Wing Terrorist Jailed
- GCSE AQA English Literature - Macbeth
- EPQ true crime sociology
- EPQ
- Hey can someone mark this AQA English Literature Essay -
- Book recommendations
- Morality is subjective in character with an objective compulsion.
- Brianna Ghey killed in quiet village
- Capital Punishment Survey
- AQA A Level Law Paper 1 26th May 2023
- BBC: Tory donor accused of racist remarks about Diane Abbott
- "there's husandry in heaven quote" - Banquo
- LNAT Essay
- Five SAS soldiers arrested for alleged war crimes in Syria
- why do guys look at you once you walk past?
- Tantalising signs of life (biosignatures) on a distant exoplanet.
Latest
Trending
Last reply 1 week ago
OCR A-level Law Paper 3 (H418/03) - 12th June 2023 [Exam Chat]Trending
Last reply 1 week ago
OCR A-level Law Paper 3 (H418/03) - 12th June 2023 [Exam Chat]
