When is murder murder

[alchresearch]

The problem is that at age 39 when he is due out of prison will he be a better person or will he kill someone else within 3 weeks of leaving prison as he did on this occasion.

 

He's been trouble ever since he was a child. His family are just as bad.

 

If you can watch BBC North West Tonight on iPlayer there were interviews with a few neighbours of the family who were too scared to appear on screen.

 

He won't be rehabilitated. No doubt he'll be lauded as a hero in jail for being a cop killer.

[blake]

It's murder. The criteria is when the assailant doesn't give a **** whether the victim lives or dies. It's s not a specific intention to kill.

[sgtkate]

It's murder. The criteria is when the assailant doesn't give a **** whether the victim lives or dies. It's s not a specific intention to kill.

 

If that was true then he'd have been convicted of murder wouldn't he. It's clearly more complicated than that.

[ANGELFIRE1]

Speed wasn't the issue. Mr.Pondlife argued that he only saw the PC at the last moment and therefore didn't intend to kill him. The jury accepted that. Intention is the key factor, not speed. Hopefully he'll not get out before his 20 years are up.

 

 

It's in the papers that he will be released after 10 years.

 

Angel1.

 

---------- Post added 22-03-2016 at 16:05 ----------

 

I think it was murder, but why do these Policemen get into harms way, chuck the stinger and run like crazy out of the way, and if the offender has time to drive around it, so be it. We don't want them to perish doing their job.

 

Angel1.

[monkey104]

Im not sure what the issue with the sentence is.

Had he been sentenced for murder he would have got pretty much the same sentence.

20 years for manslaughter is a pretty stiff sentence, I'm not saying he doesn't deserve it but I daresay either way once he gets out he will be no stranger to the criminal justice sentence.

Never mind though, the tax payer will always front his legal aid bill.

[999tigger]

Im not sure what the issue with the sentence is.

Had he been sentenced for murder he would have got pretty much the same sentence.

20 years for manslaughter is a pretty stiff sentence, I'm not saying he doesn't deserve it but I daresay either way once he gets out he will be no stranger to the criminal justice sentence.

Never mind though, the tax payer will always front his legal aid bill.

 

No they are different. mandatory life v 7-14 years served. 20 years was more than i thought but ofc they give extra because it was a pc.

[Marx]

depends on what they were charged with manslaughter probably, murder and they got life and before the changes was 15 years

 

The average term that a killer served in jail for killing someone regardless of which charge was brought, was seven years.

[taxman]

It's murder. The criteria is when the assailant doesn't give a **** whether the victim lives or dies. It's s not a specific intention to kill.

 

I believe that may be the case in other countries, it's called depraved indifference. Doesn't apply here.

[999tigger]

The average term that a killer served in jail for killing someone regardless of which charge was brought, was seven years.

 

Wheres that stat from?

[Olive]

I'm surprised no-one's mentioned this already, but I was reading about this case in yesterday's Metro on the way to work.

 

After the sentence was passed, the judge revealed to the jury that the passenger had claimed the driver had said "Watch this" before he drove at the policeman. ie indicating he knew exactly what he was doing. But this was not presented to the jury by the prosecution.

 

The report went on to say something about the prosecution being pleased with the verdict and that the way things were done left little option for appeal, so there was seems to be method in their approach, but I'm blowed if I understand why. The report indicated that the jury and the family of the victim were upset that the full facts weren't heard before that point.