Police officer accidentally strangles lover

james.miller said:
which case facts are important? that he was a serial cheater? that a previous lover said he 'groomed women'? doesnt that just make him look worse?
Click to expand...

I'm going to go out on this totally wild limb.

And suggest the case facts (and defence in general which also matters) which the jury was presented.

Not this farce of starting from an entrenched position of assuming guilt. Which in this case specifically means intent to kill. The man already admitted manslaughter, which he will be sentenced for.

cheesyboy said:
I'm not suggesting that he should be treated in the eyes of the law as a murderer. That's why I said to discount the law at the start of this. The law failed its chance at that.

My point is that morally he is a murderer. We don't take our morals from law, as that would be insane.
Click to expand...

Well this doesn't sound like it's worth arguing. It'll be semantics and the bedrock of opinions.

He's killed someone, he's admitted it. The case was about the details which would give it the legal label of murder.

Your opinion of what label he should have well... it's not really important is it.
 
Last edited:
Angilion said:
That would be true if your comment is taken out of the context you chose to put it in - a direct and sole reply and rebuttal to a comment about intent, not motive. I didn't read it wrong. I read it in context. Context which this forum removes when quoting.
Click to expand...
Angilion. I'm telling you the exact context to read it in. stop being obtuse and accept it. I didn't say motive = intent, I said he had a motive so...(this is the bit you work out for yourself). Stop strawmanning me just because you can imply an context from my post when I have TOLD you exactly how to read it.
 
Also worth noting, you don't need to prove intent to kill to prove murder. You need to prove intent to cause grievous bodily harm and the person subsequently died.
 
arknor said:
anyone else and it would have been murder
Click to expand...

Not necessarily. Several years ago a very distant relative of my wife’s was stabbed to death in an argument. The killer ended up with what seemed a very lenient sentence for manslaughter. The bar for proving murder is set very high.
 
The standard of proof is beyond reasonable doubt. Just by reading the case you can guess that it was beyond reasonable doubt that he squeezed the life out of her after she's texted his wife about their affair.

I've been in courts and seen lay people of the jury. Some of them struggle to read out the oath, but that's by-the-by.

The CPS should have pushed harder on this one. It has not painted the judiciary in a very good light whatsoever. This murderer will be out in 5 years.
 
Blue160 said:
Not necessarily. Several years ago a very distant relative of my wife’s was stabbed to death in an argument. The killer ended up with what seemed a very lenient sentence for manslaughter. The bar for proving murder is set very high.
Click to expand...
seems its reserved for serial killers.

heat of the moment crap is BS
 
I doubt he is being protected as he was having sex with another officers wife behind his back.

He sounds like a right toerag.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom