Court upholds drunken driver's murder conviction

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Asher
How the hell is that not murder?

If I shot you dead for your BS you spew here all the time, that's not murder? Oh, I wish...

Here in the civilized west, murder is really just the unlawful killing of a person by another.

That's because murder, even in the civilised west, requires intent. If there was no intent, it's not murder by definition.

So it's murder if you shoot me because of the superior arguments I post here, because there certainly is intent.

OTOH, if you have a quarrel with your bf, gets upset, beat him over the head with a blunt object several times in your fury, then find him dead, it's not murder.

[Asher]

What exactly is your intent by pulling the trigger and shooting the man, if not to murder him? It doesn't matter if he made you mad by making fun of your small penis, it's still murder.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Asher
What exactly is your intent by pulling the trigger and shooting the man, if not to murder him?

You don't always intent to pull the trigger when you point a gun at somebody. You may just wish to scare or intimidate him. For example, you could be brandishing the gun and yelling "Get the hell out of here! Right now! I don't want to see your stinkin' face again!" when he gets stupid and says "But you have a small penis!"

Upon hearing this you temporarily lose control and shoots him a couple of times to shut him up. It wouldn't be murder if he dies.

[Wernazuma III]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger


OTOH, if you have a quarrel with your bf, gets upset, beat him over the head with a blunt object several times in your fury, then find him dead, it's not murder.

Well, it depends. In those cases, at least in Austria, sometimes the charge is murder (if the jury finds that the obejctive of hitting so hard and often was to kill the man) or "intentional severe injury with lethal result".
The emotional side may slightly change the judge's opinion of guilt (and lead him to count that in, giving a somewhat slighter penalty), but it does not change the charge.
It's something different when the man gets physically attacked before and as a result of an uncontrolled reaction the man kills the attacker. That's not always "protectional killing", but there's some time-span after a hit when a reaction may be found "automatical".

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Asher


IIRC, it is a crime not to help somebody in need in Canada (ie, not aiding a dying man). Don't think it's murder, but manslaughter maybe.

Cite ??

[Sikander]

That Buck Strickland fellow sure had it coming. I'm surprised that he got 30 years though after the assistant manager at his propane business gave such a great performance as his character witness.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
There is a difference between the following two scenario:

1. You come home in the evening and found your wife in bed with another man. You get angry, point a gun at him, think to yourself "Die, bloody bastard!" and pull the trigger.

2. You come home in the evening and found your wife in bed with another man. You get angry, point a gun at him, starts yelling, and something your wife/the other guy says pushes you over the edge, so you pull the trigger.

1 is murder, 2 is not.

Both would probably be voluntary manslaughter actually. Both are 'crimes of passion'. In fact, the 2nd one may be MORE conducive to a murder charge. You point a gun, hesitate, and only when something was said do you pull the trigger. The split second hesitation may change it to a passion crime to a premeditated one, depending on the evidence, of course.

[Dinner]

Murder means you went out and intended to kill someone which is very different from just being a complete and total idiot. The guy should get years in jail but he should be charged with vehicular homicide or manslaughter or something.

[SlowwHand]

Originally posted by Wernazuma III


For some reason, I fail to see the logical connection between a) and b).


edit: the bold text is result of F***** OTBOT.

edit edit: After editing in the word OTBOT, it changed from "Take this into consideration" to "Don't use my name in vain" and the bold text was gone.

I was being semi sarcastic, taking what was said previously as my point.

Don't jump to disagree with me so willingly. For instance, this.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Oerdin
Murder means you went out and intended to kill someone

Not always.

Felony murder and depraved heart murder attest to that.

[Deity Dude]

I think it depends on which "murder" you are talking about.

It is my understanding that the different degrees of murder have roughly the following definitions.

First Degree Murder: an unlawful killing that is both willful and premeditated or any death (even an accidental one) results from the commission of certain violent felonies (arson, burglary, kidnapping, rape, and armed robbery).

Second Degree Murder/Voluntary Manslaughter: an unlawful, intentional killing that is not premeditated or planned.

Third Degree Murder/Involuntary Manslaughter: all unlawful killings not defined as Murder I or Murder II usually of an unintentional nature.

Reckless Endangerment: a person recklessly engages in illegal conduct which creates a grave risk of death or severe injury to another person. (Kinda like Attempted involuntary manslaughter)

In my opinion he should get vehicular manslaughter which is considered at type of Involuntary Manslaughter.

Not murder 1 or 2.

[SlowwHand]

No. This was a repeat offense, making it felony. A killing during the commission of a felony.
The guy is a dumbass who refused to modify his behavior. So now, it's being modified for him.

[Ecthy]

With people like SlowwHand, fascism is thinkable everywhere. I haven't seen so much unreflected support of authority and low/zero-tolerance anywhere ever before!

[SlowwHand]

Zero tolerance? Ok, how many times do you say he had to get a dwi, and kill people, before you think it's not zero tolerance?

Can I go rob a bank then and maybe shoot a guard, just once? Pretty please?

The guy was an habitual. In spite of previous arrests, he continued. This is not zero tolerance. For all we know, in fact, had he not murdered someone, he might have got off yet again. Which really speaks highly of the court, now doesn't it?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Deity Dude
I think it depends on which "murder" you are talking about.

It is my understanding that the different degrees of murder have roughly the following definitions.

First Degree Murder: an unlawful killing that is both willful and premeditated or any death (even an accidental one) results from the commission of certain violent felonies (arson, burglary, kidnapping, rape, and armed robbery).

Second Degree Murder/Voluntary Manslaughter: an unlawful, intentional killing that is not premeditated or planned.

Third Degree Murder/Involuntary Manslaughter: all unlawful killings not defined as Murder I or Murder II usually of an unintentional nature.

Reckless Endangerment: a person recklessly engages in illegal conduct which creates a grave risk of death or severe injury to another person. (Kinda like Attempted involuntary manslaughter)

In my opinion he should get vehicular manslaughter which is considered at type of Involuntary Manslaughter.

Not murder 1 or 2.

Manslaughter is NOT the same as murder charges. They are a lesser offense.

Some more on murder intent (malice aforethought):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder

The intent to commit murder is often called malice aforethought, and can be inferred when the defendant commits an act that shows depraved indifference to human life, or (in federal court and those states that apply the felony murder rule) whenever a victim is killed during the commission of another felony, whether or not the defendant intended the killing, or even committed the fatal act. In this case, the intention to place the victim in great bodily harm is inferred from the defendant's intent to commit the felony. Some states also require the underlying felony to be an 'inherently' dangerous one.