Soldato
Killed for a bike...
- Thread starter SK07
- Start date
I'd agree, but it's very likely they didn't intend to kill him, making it manslaughter.Tute said:
But, if what Jumpingmedic said is true about manslaughter during a robbery being classed as muder, then definitely lock them up for murder and throw away the key.
Permabanned
Jumpingmedic said:
Really? From what I can see it should be manslaughter, not murder.
They are little ******s, but you don't intend to end somebody's life for a bike. If it was murder they planned, why take the bike? As a bonus, as a trophy?
It sounds to me like they wanted the bike, so they assaulted him to get it. He died as a result of the assault, but the key is that it's unlikely it was premeditated, because if murder was their aim, why not just stab or shoot him?
Give them the biggest manslaughter charge possible, but I don't think it should be murder. Unless of course the police have reason to believe that killing somebody was also on the agenda.
Permabanned
To whack someone off the said bike?
If I was to pick a murder weapon, I wouldn't pick a to plank of wood as I wouldn't necessarily think it was definitely going to kill somebody. Hammer, knife, gun etc sure.
However, it does depend on the circumstances, and the reason that they are being charged with murder infers that the police have reason to believe they wanted to kill him. E.g. they beat him until he was dead and then took the bike as well. However, if it was simply, a whack to the face to get him off the bike, they legged it with their prize and he later died, then no, it should be manslaughter.
If I was to pick a murder weapon, I wouldn't pick a to plank of wood as I wouldn't necessarily think it was definitely going to kill somebody. Hammer, knife, gun etc sure.
However, it does depend on the circumstances, and the reason that they are being charged with murder infers that the police have reason to believe they wanted to kill him. E.g. they beat him until he was dead and then took the bike as well. However, if it was simply, a whack to the face to get him off the bike, they legged it with their prize and he later died, then no, it should be manslaughter.
Soldato
I've already had one decent bike nicked, not nice. I only ever ride an old clapped out apollo if I intend to leave my bike locked up anywhere - It's not ideal, but I if that gets nicked, I'm not too bothered.LordSplodge said:If we aren't killed by cars not seeing us/giving us enough space we now run the risk of ****** killing us for our pride and joy.
Can't even lock your bike up in public without the damn thing getting nicked
I've also had more close moments than I can count - I think something needs to change if the government expects us to all cycle to work.
I hope those people who killed that guy get whats coming to them...
If I had my way, I'd d-lock all bike thieves up to posts and railings, for days on end.
Associate
iCraig said:
I think it is a law that if you kill someone during a robbery due to an act of violence, or even in the case of accidents sometimes, then it is automatically murder, regardless of all initial intentions; murderous or not. I'm not a lawyer so I stand open to correction but I'm sure this is the way it always works in similar cases I've seen progress before.
The argument is that injuring someone, especially in the head, nearly always has the potential to kill them and that you wrecklessly endangered their life for your own profit. Manslaughter would be when you accidently put someones life in danger. Intentionally whacking someone round the head has a high chance of killing them and thus it is a case of deliberate endangerment of life: i.e murder or attempted murder.
Whether or not the murder was planned may have an effect on the sentencing, but not on the charge.
In fact one case I remember a while back was a gang of teens pushed an old woman over at a bus stop and she broke her ankle. A few weeks later the woman developed a clot in her ankle which travelled to her brain and killed her. I remember there was a bit of a scuffle over whether murder charges could be brought against the kids, who had already been caught, charged with assault, cautioned and released by that time. In the end they weren't but they do take this kind of thing seriously. Doesn't matter whether you mean to kill someone or not. If they die through an unwarrented act of violence on your part then I think it should always be considered murder.
Last edited:
Jumpingmedic said:
You're absolutely right. Mens rea may be established so long as the assailant knows that death may well result from his or her violent actions. They don't need to plot the death hours beforehand.
Of course they may not be charged with murder if the CPS doesn't think such a charge will stick, but the distinction between murder and manslaughter is not clear cut.
Associate
iCraig said:
Premeditation isn't a prequisite for a murder charge... murder is simply defined as the unlawful killing of another person. Premeditation may seriously increase the sentence and the chance of a successful conviction but is irrelevent in all other respects.
Manslaughter is applicable where there is evidence of mitigating circumstances; self defence that went too far, insanity (temporary or otherwise). Wanting to relieve someone of his bike and ensuring co-operation by braining him with a fence post are not mitigating circumstances.
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Mar 2006
- Posts
- 6,712
- I thought murder was classed as requiring intent to end life, whereas manslaughter would be unlawful killing without intent to kill?
Associate
Monkey Puzzle said:
I think the difference is officially to do with malice. ie murder is killing with malice, manslaughter is without. Intention to kill is not relevant, only whether or not you did kill. From that point on it's either murder or manslaughter, and I believe manslaughter requires a pretty good excuse for the killing, and as I said I don't think "really really wanting that guys bike" is much of an excuse.
As Crispy Pigeon said murder and manslaughter arn't terribly well defined which leads to a lot of cases that (I think) should be murder being downgraded to manslaughter just to ensure a guilty plea or make it easier for the jury to find them guilty...
Monkey Puzzle said:
Under English law, it's defined as "The unlawful killing of a human being, under the Queens Peace, with malice aforethought"! Under mens rea it's "intention to cause death, or to cause serious injury with knowledge that death may result".
Associate
Azagoth said:
Yes thats the phrase I was fumbling for: knowledge that death may result.... I tried looking up mens rea but all i got was special offers on mens reading glasses
In any case I think a serious manslaughter charge can work out much the same as a lower level murder charge in terms of sentence, so let's hope justice is done one way or the other.