| |
G4EBT > WURDZ 18.01.07 15:31l 161 Lines 6087 Bytes #999 (0) @ GBR.EU
BID : 904264G4EBT
Read: GUEST
Subj: Re: Homcide vs Murder ?
Path: ON0AR<HS1LMV<CX2SA<CX4AE<CX2ACB<N2BQF<N9PMO<GB7LDI<GB7VLS<GB7ESX<
GB7FCR
Sent: 070117/2334Z @:GB7FCR.#16.GBR.EU #:14774 [Blackpool] FBB-7.03a $:904264G4
From: G4EBT@GB7FCR.#16.GBR.EU
To : WURDZ@GBR
Andy, G0FTD wrote:-
> I've noticed a trend in the last few years that homicide is being used
> instead of plain old murder - I wonder what started this change ?
It's nothing new.
"Homicide" covers both murder and manslaughter. It isn't an Americanism or
an alternative to murder, it's the correct Brtish all embracing term,
which simply encompasses the killing of a human being by another person.
In fact "homicide" came into English in 14th C, from Old French,
from Latin [homo man + caedere to slay]
There's actually no such thing as a "Murder Act" in UK law - murder and
manslaughter is covered by the Homicide Act, 1957 but even that doesn't
define "murder".
The Act mainly deals with a number of special defences that can be pleaded
to the charge. To discover how the law of murder eveolved, means trawling
back through a serious of important judgments back to the 1600s.
> Perhaps it's a desire to makes us all feel more American, but I don't
> like it.
>I'll stick to using murder thanks.
If it is murder, that's the correct term, but I say, murder is only one
form of homicide - there's manslaughter too.
That answers Andy's point.
Criminal law is heavy going topic of narrow appeal, but the following info
might be of interest to anyone who might want to know a bit more about it.
There are three elements to any crime:
1) Actus reus (the act itself)
2) Mens rea (the state of mind when the act was committed).
3) The absence of a valid defence.
The actus reus of murder is exactly the same as manslaughter and has four
elements:
*Causing the death
*Of another human being
*Under the queen's peace
*Within any country of the realm
All of these elemnts must be present - if any one is missing, there can't
be liability for murder under English law. (There used to be a fifth
element:
*Death had to occur within a year and a day. That was abolished in 1996.
The "mens rea" (state of mind) of murder is "malice aforethought".
This means one of two things:
i) An intention to kill (*express* malice aforethought)
ii) An intention to cause grievous bodily harm (*implied*
malice aforethought)
Either state of mind will be sufficient for a conviction of murder, but if
both are missing, the defendant can't be convicted of murder, though he
may face liability for involuntary manslaughter.
Murder can be harder to prove than we might imagine. There are lots of
cases where we may will feel that a murder conviction should ensue, but
it only results in a charge or conviction of manslaughter.
In the UK, few people plead guilty to murder as there's no incentive to do
so. For most other offences an early guilty plea and remorse will result
in a lighter sentence - up to a third off that which would normally be
imposed.
Not so with murder, for which there's an automatic life sentence. Hence,
it pays the defendant to say that either they didn't commit the offence at
all, or if they did, that they never meant to kill the victim. That way,
they may "get off" a murder charge and be convicted of manslaughter, with
a much lighter sentence.
Let's say someone would get 9 years for manslaughter if convicted after
a trial, but that he agrees to plead guilty, and shows remorse. He'd get
a third off for his guilty plea, making it six years, of which he'd serve
half in prison, the other half out on licence.
So a nine-year sentence becomes 4.5 years.
As we know, een for murder a life sentence in the UK doesn't often mean
you spend the rest of your life behind bars, but it does mean that the
conviction is never spent.
When/if someone with a life sentence is released, they stay on parole for
the rest of their life and can be recalled at any time if they give
grounds for concern without the need for a further conviction.
EG, and argument in a pub, and altercation with another motorist - any
tendency to show aggression or violence.
Consideration is being given in the UK as to whether or not there should
be two degrees of murder, as in some other countries - first and second
degree.
Like most people there's a lot I could say about the inadequacy of
sentencing for violent crimes in the UK, which is frankly woeful.
In a recent case, a man who raped a 12-week-old baby has had his minimum
jail term changed from six to eight years by appeal judges. The five-year
term originally imposed on Alan Webster's accomplice, Tanya French, will
remain.
Webster, 40, was sentenced to life in January but was eligible to apply
for parole after six years. French, 19, was jailed for five years.
In my view, French was as guilty as Webster and it's frightening to think
that this woman could be released in just 19 months' time. Even if she
serves the full term of her sentence, she'll be released in just over four
years' time."
I'll let others decide on what they consider to be an approriate sentence
for raping a 12-wk old baby.
As to "life sentences" I think that when the British public supported the
abolition of the death penalty, they assumed that a life sentence would
mean just that.
In other words, that there'd never be a point in a civilised society, at
which someone has taken another person's life, would ever be free again,
let alone be free to kill again.
The victim can't have their life back, nor can the bereaved, so why should
the perpetrator? Bereaved relatives serve a life sentence of abject
misery, made all the worse by the release of killers after a few short
years.
Recently, a man who'd battered his partner to death with a brick, for
which (for reasons which elude me) was sentenced to just seven years
for manslaughter was released after less than four years.
Within months he burnt down the house of a 16-yr old girl who had rejected
his advances, murdering thee occupants. he's got life for that, which is a
bit late in the day.
"Tough on crime - tough on the causes of crime"?
Nuff said.
Rambling again.
Night night.
73 - David, G4EBT @ GB7FCR
Message timed: 23:25 on 2007-Jan-17
Message sent using WinPack-Telnet V6.70
(Registered).
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
