Crime - defruading vs killing

[ChrisJSY]

The case that one person should have died after a punch to the face due to falling over afterwards and knocking his head too hard is not a murder as a result of an intent to cause GBH.

I always wonder how people would quickly change their minds on it should it happen to someone they know closely. After all, if it wasn't for the violent act in the first place that would not have happened and someone would still be alive today. The action caused the reaction, it's murder end of. Just because some other people agreed on some legal spiel to make it otherwise doesn't mean it is.

 

[Devrij]

Westlaw?

I do appreciate what the OP is saying to an extent. The sentencing for white collar crime seems at face value to be extraordinarily high.

White collar crime is extremely damaging to our society compared to violent crime. It also effects all of us. I think white collar crime should be taken more seriously if anything.

 

[Nitefly]

White collar crime is extremely damaging to our society compared to violent crime. It also effects all of us. I think white collar crime should be taken more seriously if anything.

I don't disagree with the seriousness of white collar crime. My point was that you can get a not too disimilar sentence for several tens of thousands worth of financial fiddlings as for a crime that might end a life. At face value, that does seem odd, but you are right in saying there are reasons that justify it... particuarly as it relatively easy to do.

 

[bhavv]

From having been punched in the face a few times during my school years, and also having practiced karate for a few years, my opinion wouldn't change at all if the same thing happened to someone I personally know.

 

[Nitefly]

From having been punched in the face a few times during my school years, and also having practiced karate for a few years, my opinion wouldn't change at all if the same thing happened to someone I personally know.

Are you actually a superhero? Insane self studying, musical virtuoso and now martial arts master?

 

[Bill101]

I thought murderers cannot be released until they're deemed safe by the parole board, hence why they have life sentences.

A fraudster, while not a good citizen, at least won't kill anyone when let out so the 13 year sentencing is ridiculous for a non-violent crime.

Murderers are released on licence and any other offence can result in them being called back to prison to complete their sentence.

Giving a fraudster a long sentence stops them getting out in a couple of years to spend all the money as well as being a deterent to others. This guy has stashed millions and millions away

 

[spudbynight]

I always wonder how people would quickly change their minds on it should it happen to someone they know closely. After all, if it wasn't for the violent act in the first place that would not have happened and someone would still be alive today. The action caused the reaction, it's murder end of. Just because some other people agreed on some legal spiel to make it otherwise doesn't mean it is.

If you had an argument with some random guy who called you a "wally" and punch him is that murder?

Of course not, if the same punch causes him to fall over and knock his head and die is that murder?

It is the same action - with the same intention. In the second case it is manslaughter not murder.

 

[bhavv]

Are you actually a superhero? Insane self studying, musical virtuoso and now martial arts master?

I'm two of those things yes. Taking classes in any sport however doesn't make you a master of that sport, its simply getting some exercise. And I'm not a superhero.

Oh, and I used to regularly get the highest science test scores in my pre GCSE science classes, but that stopped after my school stuck me in the top science set, and then I realized I was merely average and previously studying in classes full of stupid kids.

 

[yer_averagejoe]

The law states that death caused by an attack with intent to cause GBH is murder, clear cut.

Here with have an unprovoked assault with clear intent to harm and obvious knowledge it was likely to result in death.

A) Punching someone is not GBH.
B) how is it obvious that his actions would result in death?

Looks pretty simple to me. Clear-cut manslaughter and 8 years seems like a reasonable sentence, given the context.

 

[yer_averagejoe]

The action caused the reaction, it's murder end of.

I don't think you understand the meaning of "murder". Murder is defined by the intent to kill. In this case, there was no intent to kill, ergo: not murder or in other terms, manslaughter.

 

[elmarko]

Yes, but there was no intent to cause GBH.

Just out of curiosity, what then was the intent?.

We undervalue assault/GBH in this country, not that I'm asking for long sentences, but the crime should be treated seriously enough to warrant them receiving the rehabilitation they clearly need - as that kind of behaviour is very rarely isolated to one instance.

A slap on the wrist for general assault/GBH only gives out the impression that this kind of behaviour is acceptable (when it clearly isn't).

We don't need draconian long term harsh sentences which only seem to create hardened career criminals, but neither do we need a soft touch legal system which doesn't address the problems either - we need a sensible balance of rehabilitation & ensuring the public is protected.

Ending the war of drugs would allow us to imprison these people for longer - as the amount of money wasted on the futile endeavour could be used to solve more pressing social issues, rather than "person A" picking one drug over booze/fags, then spending untold fortunes trying to fight it (resulting in fewer people in prison & being able to spend some of the money saved/generated from taxation on rehabilitating our prisoners & thus reducing the chance of re-offending).

 

[Nitefly]

A) Punching someone is not GBH.

Well, being faily pedantic it's possible to construct a scenario where punching someone might be.

 

[Fenris]

Just out of curiosity, what then was the intent?.

You need to remember than GBH refers to causing harm in a very specific way, namely "wounding", not just causing general harm. Giving someone a black eye does not constitute GBH for example.

 

[bhavv]

Well, being faily pedantic it's possible to construct a scenario where punching someone might be.

So construct such a scenario and give us an example.

 

[bitslice]

A white guy convicted of fraud would probably be let off with losing his MBE, it's really expensive to prosecute such crimes so they don't bother.
I can't remember ever beng shocked at the sentence length of any previous white collar frauds, they have all been singe digit sentences IIRC.

It's pretty obvious that everything regarding the riots has been OTT, blatantly judges have been told to send a message to poor people so they will know their place.

 

[Nitefly]

So construct such a scenario and give us an example.

Tying someone up, informing them you are going to mash their face in, then punching them hard enough (with or without brittle bones) so that it breaks their skull. Pretty horrible, but that would work. The important thing here is the intent and the outcome, not how the outcome occurs. In my example, the dialogue and tying up are indicators of the intent.

Punching someone alone might not be enough to form the intent for malicious wounding or GBH, but some other factors might contribute to this, like in my example.

 

[Fenris]

So construct such a scenario and give us an example.

There are requirements for something to be classed as GBH, punching someone does not always cause GBH due to these requirements.

For GBH to have been caused, the assault has to have caused a wound. A wound being "a division of the whole skin and not merely a division of the cuticle or upper layer", i.e a bruise is not a wound and neither is a broken bone.

 

[Nitefly]

There are requirements for something to be classed as GBH, punching someone does not always cause GBH due to these requirements.

For GBH to have been caused, the assault has to have caused a wound. A wound being "a division of the whole skin and not merely a division of the cuticle or upper layer", i.e a bruise is not a wound and neither is a broken bone.

Sure about that...? From memory, that is not the case, but I don't have any law books near me. Essentially, it's all a s.20 offence, but it can be achieved in different ways.

 

[Fenris]

Sure about that...?

According to me furious wiki-ing, yes.

It also includes "really serious injury", though what constitutes that is up to the judge.

 

[bhavv]

There are requirements for something to be classed as GBH, punching someone does not always cause GBH due to these requirements.

For GBH to have been caused, the assault has to have caused a wound. A wound being "a division of the whole skin and not merely a division of the cuticle or upper layer", i.e a bruise is not a wound and neither is a broken bone.

A single punch to the face won't be causing that kind of a wound in any case.