Convicted of a murder they didn't commit

cheesyboy

cheesyboy

cheesyboy

Soldato
Joined
7 Dec 2012
Posts
17,613
Location
Gloucestershire
Three guys have been convicted of the murder of their fellow gangmember, who was, the court accepted, killed by a rival gang.

www.bbc.co.uk

Men jailed for murder of friend killed by rival gang in shootout

Jurors heard they fired knowing rivals would shoot back, in what is thought to be a landmark case.
www.bbc.co.uk

Some sort of Joint Enterprise law.

Quite clearly, these guys should go to jail. But surely it should be for the guns and the intent, rather than a murder that was at someone else's hand?!

Horrible law, this.
 
rodders said:
As Dis86 said, they directly contributed to it. Either way, gang people are in jail, that's only a good thing, right?
Click to expand...
I would think that the same result from the more equitable method of convicting for things they actually did would be better in principle.
 
cheesyboy said:
I would think that the same result from the more equitable method of convicting for things they actually did would be better in principle.
Click to expand...
They 'actually did this' though, the prosecution would have got nowhere if the case didn't meet the fundamental requirements for murder
 
Kenai said:
They 'actually did this' though, the prosecution would have got nowhere if the case didn't meet the fundamental requirements for murder
Click to expand...
That would be the "horrible law, this" bit of the OP.

It's interesting that so many responses are happy with this because it's a good result (these guys absolutely should be jailed), with so little concern for the way the result was achieved.
 
strange law though if you're with a mate and you slap a cop who then tazers your mate and he dies do you get charged with murder? if a butterfly in the rainforest flaps it's wing and your nan has a heart attack should we kill it with fire?
 
Last edited:
It's a weird one but I can see the logic really...

> gang A members attempt to murder opposing gang B members.
> opposing gang B shoots back in response, which is the expected outcome, and kill one of the unarmed people in gang A.

So they attempted murder by shooting at people, and in the events that followed someone died. Doesn't seem completely mad that that would count as murder.

I think a key point is that they will have been in no doubt that the opposing gang would have shot back in response / self defence.
 
Last edited:
GreatAuk said:
It's a weird one but I can see the logic really...

> gang A members attempt to murder opposing gang B members.
> opposing gang B shoots back in response, which is the expected outcome, and kill one of the unarmed people in gang A.

So they attempted murder by shooting at people, and in the events that followed someone died. Doesn't seem completely mad that that would count as murder.

I think a key point is that they will have been under no doubt that the opposing gang would have shot back in response / self defence.
Click to expand...
what if your driving home from the pub in your mates car and he's drunk, should you be charged with the murder of the guy crossing the road that he killed? because you were in the car with him and didn't stop him
 
arknor said:
what if your driving home from the pub in your mates car and he's drunk, should you be charged with the murder of the guy crossing the road that he killed? because you were in the car with him and didn't stop him
Click to expand...
Why would that constitute murder?
 
arknor said:
strange law though if you're with a mate and you slap a cop who then tazers your mate and he dies do you get charged with murder? if a butterfly in the rainforest flaps it's wing and your nan has a heart attack should we kill it with fire?
Click to expand...

If only ocuk had a facepalm emoji.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom