Is it me ????

[bobo the clown]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/glou ... 284184.stm

3 people kidnap, torture for weeks & ultimately kill an epileptic guy they knew ... and get 29 years between them. About 5 years served if not let out early to prevent overcrowding the jails.

Now, call me old fashioned, but shouldn't this be a minimum of 25yrs each, if you insist on not looking at capital punishment ???

[Hoboh]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/glou ... 284184.stm

3 people kidnap, torture for weeks & ultimately kill an epileptic guy they knew ... and get 29 years between them. About 5 years served if not let out early to prevent overcrowding the jails.

Now, call me old fashioned, but shouldn't this be a minimum of 25yrs each, if you insist on not looking at capital punishment ???

In the abscence of the knotted rope life should be life!

[communistworkethic]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/glou ... 284184.stm

3 people kidnap, torture for weeks & ultimately kill an epileptic guy they knew ... and get 29 years between them. About 5 years served if not let out early to prevent overcrowding the jails.

Now, call me old fashioned, but shouldn't this be a minimum of 25yrs each, if you insist on not looking at capital punishment ???

i was more concerned by the BBC's headline of "Men Found Guilty of Killing Kevin Davies"

[Hoboh]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/glou ... 284184.stm

3 people kidnap, torture for weeks & ultimately kill an epileptic guy they knew ... and get 29 years between them. About 5 years served if not let out early to prevent overcrowding the jails.

Now, call me old fashioned, but shouldn't this be a minimum of 25yrs each, if you insist on not looking at capital punishment ???

i was more concerned by the BBC's headline of "Men Found Guilty of Killing Kevin Davies"

That would need an army Commie don't worry Davo's safe.

[walkingdownthemannyroad]

My girl wants to party all the time.

[Hoboh]

My girl wants to party all the time.

Now you've really lost me there!!!

[Bruce Rioja]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/glou ... 284184.stm

3 people kidnap, torture for weeks & ultimately kill an epileptic guy they knew ... and get 29 years between them. About 5 years served if not let out early to prevent overcrowding the jails.

Now, call me old fashioned, but shouldn't this be a minimum of 25yrs each, if you insist on not looking at capital punishment ???

Well, perhaps anyone with a legal bent (Leadsucker ) can help me with this one. In November, last. A 25 year old was stabbed to death by a 19 year old outside a take-away place on Bradshawgate. The aggressor stabbed his victim 15 times, including one blow through the skull so hard that the knife bent. Apparently the squabble started in a bar. Today, he was found guilty of manslaughter. Now then, exactly what part of that isn't murder? Some guy's gone out, armed with a knife, stabs someone 15 times (and think about that, count to 15 and consider the horrific reality of puncturing another human being with every count) how is that absolutely anything other than cold blooded murder? I don't understand!

[Montreal Wanderer]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/glou ... 284184.stm

3 people kidnap, torture for weeks & ultimately kill an epileptic guy they knew ... and get 29 years between them. About 5 years served if not let out early to prevent overcrowding the jails.

Now, call me old fashioned, but shouldn't this be a minimum of 25yrs each, if you insist on not looking at capital punishment ???

Well, perhaps anyone with a legal bent (Leadsucker ) can help me with this one. In November, last. A 25 year old was stabbed to death by a 19 year old outside a private hire place on Bradshawgate. The aggressor stabbed his victim 15 times, including one blow through the skull so hard that the knife bent. Apparently the squabble started in a bar. Today, he was found guilty of manslaughter. Now? Exactly what part of that isn't murder? Some guy's gone out, armed with a knife, stabs someone 15 times (and think about that, count to 15 and consider the horrific reality of puncturing another human being with every count) how is that absolutely anything other than cold blooded murder? I don't understand!

I can't help you there, Bruce, legal bent or otherwise. I suppose the verdict might be based on circumstances not mentioned in your summary. I also doubt it would be considered 'cold-blooded', but would certainly be murder in the second degree here.

[Bruce Rioja]

I can't help you there, Bruce, legal bent or otherwise. I suppose the verdict might be based on circumstances not mentioned in your summary. I also doubt it would be considered 'cold-blooded', but would certainly be murder in the second degree here.

See, we don't have degrees of murder over here (as far as I know). Either it is or it isn't. For me, a guy going out armed with a knife and stabbing another guy 15 times, whether he'd deliberately targeted him previously or not, is still murder. It's not self-defence under any description, how could it be?. Not so sure what Truman Capote would've made of it though.

[TANGODANCER]

is that absolutely anything other than cold blooded murder? I don't understand!

I can't help you there, Bruce, legal bent or otherwise. I suppose the verdict might be based on circumstances not mentioned in your summary. I also doubt it would be considered 'cold-blooded', but would certainly be murder in the second degree here.[/quote]

Never quite figured "degrees" of murder Monty. If it's deliberate intent to kill then it's murder. If the killing happens because of an accident without intent then it's manslaughter. If someone's attacked with a killing weapon then the intent must be to kill so that constitutes attempted murder fo me. Since most sentencing these days is a joke and "punishment" is usually lock up with priveleges and early release for "good behaviour"( another joke in itself. How the fxxk can a murderer be behaving well) , the whole thing becomes almost imaterial.

Just another example of our country being run by idiots who let their positions elevate themselves into the untouchable bracket. Justice has become a laughing stock and criminals an elite society.

[Montreal Wanderer]

I can't help you there, Bruce, legal bent or otherwise. I suppose the verdict might be based on circumstances not mentioned in your summary. I also doubt it would be considered 'cold-blooded', but would certainly be murder in the second degree here.

See, we don't have degrees of murder over here (as far as I know). Either it is or it isn't. For me, a guy going out armed with a knife and stabbing another guy 15 times, whether he'd deliberately targeted him previously or not, is still murder. It's not self-defence under any description, how could it be?. Not so sure what Truman Capote would've made of it though.

The difference here is premeditated murder (cold-blooded ) is first degree murder, murder of a policeman or prison guard, plus homicide during the commission of a crime can possibly be first degree. Unpremeditated murder (hot-blooded spur of the moment) is second degree and we also have manslaughter. The penalites here are
* First degree murder - life sentence with no possibility of parole for 25 years
* Second-degree murder - life sentence with no possibility of parole for at least ten years
* Manslaughter - life sentence with parole eligibility after seven years

[Montreal Wanderer]

I've looked up manslaughter in our criminal code and find the following:

232. (1) Culpable homicide that otherwise would be murder may be reduced to manslaughter if the person who committed it did so in the heat of passion caused by sudden provocation.

What is provocation


(2) A wrongful act or an insult that is of such a nature as to be sufficient to deprive an ordinary person of the power of self-control is provocation for the purposes of this section if the accused acted on it on the sudden and before there was time for his passion to cool.

Questions of fact


(3) For the purposes of this section, the questions

(a) whether a particular wrongful act or insult amounted to provocation, and

(b) whether the accused was deprived of the power of self-control by the provocation that he alleges he received,

are questions of fact, but no one shall be deemed to have given provocation to another by doing anything that he had a legal right to do, or by doing anything that the accused incited him to do in order to provide the accused with an excuse for causing death or bodily harm to any human being.

So, over here, it would depend on what the 25 yr-old said or did to the 19 yr-old prior to the homicide. looks like it might be the same there. What was the provocation in this case.

[Bruce Rioja]

* First degree murder - life sentence with no possibility of parole for 25 years
* Second-degree murder - life sentence with no possibility of parole for at least ten years
* Manslaughter - life sentence with parole eligibility after seven years

Herein lies the difference, Monty. This guy's gone out armed with a serious knife. He's got into a row, he's then followed his victim before butchering him. Furthermore, he's followed his victim for about half a mile. He may well not have gone out with the specific intention of attacking a pre-determined individual, but he's hardly taken it out so as to offer people a pencil sharpening service, has he?!

[Montreal Wanderer]

is that absolutely anything other than cold blooded murder? I don't understand!

I can't help you there, Bruce, legal bent or otherwise. I suppose the verdict might be based on circumstances not mentioned in your summary. I also doubt it would be considered 'cold-blooded', but would certainly be murder in the second degree here.

Never quite figured "degrees" of murder Monty. If it's deliberate intent to kill then it's murder. If the killing happens because of an accident without intent then it's manslaughter. If someone's attacked with a killing weapon then the intent must be to kill so that constitutes attempted murder fo me. Since most sentencing these days is a joke and "punishment" is usually lock up with priveleges and early release for "good behaviour"( another joke in itself. How the fxxk can a murderer be behaving well) , the whole thing becomes almost imaterial.

Just another example of our country being run by idiots who let their positions elevate themselves into the untouchable bracket. Justice has become a laughing stock and criminals an elite society.

Are you trying to make me look like a plonker, TD, confusing what I said, you said and Bruce said? Over here second degree murder is defined as any murder that is not first degree murder. First degree applies only in specific cases - premeditated murder for various motives, homicide during the commission of certain specific crimes (but not others), and murder of police and prison guards. Both degrees et life terms but there is a significant difference in parole eligibility.

[Montreal Wanderer]

* First degree murder - life sentence with no possibility of parole for 25 years
* Second-degree murder - life sentence with no possibility of parole for at least ten years
* Manslaughter - life sentence with parole eligibility after seven years

Herein lies the difference, Monty. This guy's gone out armed with a serious knife. He's got into a row, he's then followed his victim before butchering him. Furthermore, he's followed his victim for about half a mile. He may well not have gone out with the specific intention of attacking a pre-determined individual, but he's hardly taken it out so as to offer people a pencil sharpening service, has he?!

Perhaps that is why there is a difference between first and second degree here. From what you said there is only a choice between murder and manslaughter in the UK. I'll have to check your criminal code for the definition applicable in the UK.

[Bruce Rioja]

Please do, Monty. However, from what you're saying, if Peter Sutcliffe was a Canadian, would he only have been a serial second-degree murderer, on the gounds of him not having pre-selected his victims?

[Montreal Wanderer]

In looking at the UK definition of murder I find:

murder n. Unlawful homicide that does not fall into the categories of manslaughter or infanticide. The mens rea for murder is traditionally known as malice aforethought and the punishment (since 1965) is life imprisonment. Murder is subject to the special defences of diminished responsibility, suicide pact, and provocation, which serve to reduce the defendant's conviction from murder to voluntary manslaughter.

I suspect it is better to have a choice between first and second degree as canada does, than a reduction to manslaughter if there is provocation or no mens rea. Anyway I think I should leave this one up to Pencilbiter.

[Bruce Rioja]

I suspect it is better to have a choice between first and second degree as canada does.

And I tend to agree on the one hand, but into what category might Peter Sutcliffe have fallen, had he been Canadian?

[Montreal Wanderer]

I suspect it is better to have a choice between first and second degree as canada does.

And I tend to agree on the one hand, but into what category might Peter Sutcliffe have fallen, had he been Canadian?

Fair question, and it would be first degree. I didn't weary you with the full appalling English of our code but:

(5) Irrespective of whether a murder is planned and deliberate on the part of any person, murder is first degree murder in respect of a person when the death is caused by that person while committing or attempting to commit an offence under one of the following sections:

(a) section 76 (hijacking an aircraft);

(b) section 271 (sexual assault);

(c) section 272 (sexual assault with a weapon, threats to a third party or causing bodily harm);

(d) section 273 (aggravated sexual assault);

(e) section 279 (kidnapping and forcible confinement); or

(f) section 279.1 (hostage taking).

(6) Irrespective of whether a murder is planned and deliberate on the part of any person, murder is first degree murder when the death is caused by that person while committing or attempting to commit an offence under section 264 and the person committing that offence intended to cause the person murdered to fear for the safety of the person murdered or the safety of anyone known to the person murdered.

I don't know enough about the Sutcliffe case to know if he sexually assaulted his victims or forcibly confined them, but I suspect he did one of those. If not they get him under section 264 on assault:

(1) Every one commits an offence who, in any manner, knowingly utters, conveys or causes any person to receive a threat

(a) to cause death or bodily harm to any person;

He certainly assaulted the women. He might have been found not guilty by reason of insanity. Either way it would be life and he would not be paroled (this has been the history with our other serial killers - Robert Pickton is currently being charged with first degree murder - he, if found guilty, is by far our greatest serial killer by number of victims).

[TANGODANCER]

Sorry for the confusion over the quotes Monty, but if you're threatening me then I have to warn you that's premeditated. Of course you will claim provocation but the intent is there and if I get murdered I want witnesses to assertain to the fact that the balance of my grammar was disturbed at the time of sending. If you fly over here, then that might class as premeditated and also in cold blood so you're first degree. Just so you know. I will also be wary if you enter a TW open as you might just shank a ball at the back of my head and get away with manslaughter.