Manslaughter in assault cases.

[Samildanach]

I was reading an article this morning on bbc in which England is considering changing the murder laws here to possibly represent a more US style system. I was reading through the article

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4544238.stm

and came across a passage I didn't actually like very much

"Other offences, such as fights and assaults resulting in unintentional death, could be prosecuted as manslaughter "

Now up until now I have considered manslaughter a good thing, after all if you are driving along in a car on the road in pouring rain where visibility is highly reduced and you hit someone accidently killing them then manslaughter is a good verdict.

However manslaughter as the result of a direct assault (such as the recent 'happy slapping' case)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4366026.stm

whether the other person ment to kill the person or not should be prosecuted as murder IMO, firstly to deter people assaulting other people and secondly because people should always know that in a fight there is always the chance that someone could get killed.

I would be interested in your views on it.

[brien]

Quote by: Samildanach I was reading an article this morning on bbc in which England is considering changing the murder laws here to possibly represent a more US style system. I was reading through the article http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4544238.stm and came across a passage I didn't actually like very much "Other offences, such as fights and assaults resulting in unintentional death, could be prosecuted as manslaughter " Now up until now I have considered manslaughter a good thing, after all if you are driving along in a car on the road in pouring rain where visibility is highly reduced and you hit someone accidently killing them then manslaughter is a good verdict. However manslaughter as the result of a direct assault (such as the recent 'happy slapping' case) http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4366026.stm whether the other person ment to kill the person or not should be prosecuted as murder IMO, firstly to deter people assaulting other people and secondly because people should always know that in a fight there is always the chance that someone could get killed. I would be interested in your views on it.

I think your first example of manslaughter is suspect here in the US. I would consider it more accidental death by auto. Actually, no different than if two autos collide resulting in the death of a passenger or operator. It was purely accidental. There was no criminal situation in your first example. Therefore, the DA can't bring criminal charges in a situation where there was no crime.

Now if the operator of the auto is a wise guy and aims the auto at the pedestrian, and plays a chicken game, only attemting to swerve away at the last moment, and then fails resulting in the death of the pedestrian, then this would be manslaughter. There exists a criminal situation. The intentional endangerment of the pedestrain.

Manslaughter in the US is usually tied to unitentional death in the commission of a crime as a result of the actions of another. An example of two men fighting, where one strikes another, and the "stricken"" falls back and hits his head on a exposed nail and is brained, is a perfect example of manslaughter. The "striker" never meant to kill the stricken", but as a result of the strikers punch, the stricken is dead. The criminal situation is the assault.

Therefore, one has to analyze the situation in any death as a result of the commission of a crime. Homicide charges can be lodged, be it in the 1st degree, 2nd degree, or in manslaughter. Often, circumstances in America are "plea bargained" down from 2nd degree murder to manslaughter, resulting in less severe penalties.

Some examples:

1st degree homicide.........The execution of another human being with malice of forethought and criminal intent. Killing a person for not opening up the safe after you demand it during a bank robbery.

2nd degree homicide.......The killing of another person with no pre meditation. Killing a person during the commission of a bank robbery because they lunge at you to try and prevent your escape..

Manslaughter...................The accidental death of another as casued by the accused during the commission of a crime. Accidently hiting a pedestrian with the getaway car as they step off a cross walk while driving from the bank robbery.

Actually in some cases, in the commission of a felony, and in the manslaughter instance above, it may be considered 2nd degree homicide by some District Attorneys. It could be then plea bargained down to manslaughter. It all depends upon the crime and the situation.

My examples are all generally speaking and only my understanding of the degrees of homicide.

In all cases of misdeameanors, where death results, manslaughter charges would be appropriate. Not so for homicide in the 2nd and 1st degree.

I hope this helps you understand the degrees of homicide as I understand them.

[shield772]

there is in America many levels of verdicts that cover the death of another person, vehicular manslaughter, manslaughter, negligent manslaughter, variying degress of manslaughter 1 2 3, justifiable homicide, negligent homicide, murder 1 2 3, capital murder, it is quite mind boggling the ways we can say you caused the death of another person, I myself have commited justifiable homicide twice

[tivodan1116]

the phrase in America to describe how an assault that causes death can be manslaughter is "you take your victim as you find them" or the "thin skull" problem. it's an interesting legal concept.

[SlantedFacts]

Let me ask:

In London - if someone were to start assaulting you with fists and you had to push them off and they hit their head on the corner of a building which caused them to die - would that be murder?

[Matt W]

No - currently, at a guess, it would be either manslaughter, or, at a push, death by misadventure.

[G. Adams]

Manslaughter, but no criminal sentencing would be passed.

I don't think manslaughter as the result of assault should be classed as murder because

a) in the UK assault covers 'direct threatening behaviour'. So if I start aggressively shouting at someone, they back up, slip and die, I don't want to be done for murder. The grounds for assault would have to be changed.

b) if people get engaged in mutual assault, an organised fight say, I don't think the death of one should mean murder. If two people get into a ring they understand the possibilities involved, so why should the law clamp down on the killer?

[Samildanach]

I would say any decent lawyer could get you off under self defense. So long as the force you utilised was not seen as excessive for the situation you would not be charged.

[Osborn F Enready]

I have a friend who is being convicted of manslaughter. He is HOPING to only get two years prison time, but his lawyer says that is optimitic at best.

His crime?

He was at a 4-way intersection in the country, that is a major 4 lane crossing a two lane. The intersection has a stop sign for the two lane road, and it is poor visibility from both sides when sitting at the stop signs.

HE approached the intersection, admits not coming to a COMPLETE stop, but checked both directions and was going less than 2 mph. (no complete stop) As he pulled out after looking both directions, out of his blind spot, partially blocked by structures and foliage, a BICYCLIST who was travelling at top speed in top gear hit his passenger side door, as the cyclist locked up the brakes on his bicycle, it launched him into the passenger window, slightly injuring the passenger, KILLING the bicyclist.

The big problem with the case, is that the driver of the vehicle, had recently had a suspension lifted from his license, but had not yet completed the paperwork to get it back as fines were due he could not pay yet. He had work privlidges with his vehicle, and he was returning home from work at the time of the accident.

The thing is, the police are saying that since the suspension was lifted, so were his driving privlidges for work, since the only step left was to pay his fine, and have his license re-issued, so he was technically driving without a license. This of course means, no insurance coverage also.

So, this person is going to jail for years, because of a "grey area" in the law concerning driving "privlidge", and the legality surrounding it.

The intersection in question is one of the most dangerous in the area, and has been up for review for a 4-way traffic signal now for 15+ years, with several fatalities there every year due to poor visibility.


An ugly, painful case no matter what stance you hold, or who you side with.

As a sidenote, the bicyclist was around 37 years old, and cycled for fitness.

A tragedy, but I still feel prison time is harsh for something of this type.

[brien]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready I have a friend who is being convicted of manslaughter. He is HOPING to only get two years prison time, but his lawyer says that is optimitic at best. His crime? He was at a 4-way intersection in the country, that is a major 4 lane crossing a two lane. The intersection has a stop sign for the two lane road, and it is poor visibility from both sides when sitting at the stop signs. HE approached the intersection, admits not coming to a COMPLETE stop, but checked both directions and was going less than 2 mph. (no complete stop) As he pulled out after looking both directions, out of his blind spot, partially blocked by structures and foliage, a BICYCLIST who was travelling at top speed in top gear hit his passenger side door, as the cyclist locked up the brakes on his bicycle, it launched him into the passenger window, slightly injuring the passenger, KILLING the bicyclist. The big problem with the case, is that the driver of the vehicle, had recently had a suspension lifted from his license, but had not yet completed the paperwork to get it back as fines were due he could not pay yet. He had work privlidges with his vehicle, and he was returning home from work at the time of the accident. The thing is, the police are saying that since the suspension was lifted, so were his driving privlidges for work, since the only step left was to pay his fine, and have his license re-issued, so he was technically driving without a license. This of course means, no insurance coverage also. So, this person is going to jail for years, because of a "grey area" in the law concerning driving "privlidge", and the legality surrounding it. The intersection in question is one of the most dangerous in the area, and has been up for review for a 4-way traffic signal now for 15+ years, with several fatalities there every year due to poor visibility. An ugly, painful case no matter what stance you hold, or who you side with. As a sidenote, the bicyclist was around 37 years old, and cycled for fitness. A tragedy, but I still feel prison time is harsh for something of this type.

Osborn: Has your buddy been convicted yet? Otherwise, this guy needs a very, very good lawyer. Maybe a better one than he has now. He should be able to beat the manslaughter charge, or at least have it reduced through a plea bargain. However, I would go for the jugular and seek aquittal on all charges, except maybe the traffic violation(s). And if he can get the traffic violation(s) thrown out, he has a good chance of beating the manslaughter charge since it is related to the traffic violation(s). Was he cited for not stopping at the stop sign? What troubles me, and I am sure him, BIG TIME, is the "no insurance" issue. If he had insurance but the police department's "interpretation" negates the coverage, I would be confident that the attorney could get that crap squashed. This is very important.

Besides, it isn't the cops job to interpret the law. The attorney can go after the MV Department. The no insurance issue will open him up, personally, to a civil wrongful death case. Depending upon what the deceased did for a living, and if he had dependents, it could probably run into the hundreds of thousands, if not millions, in a settlement that is best left to the insurance company to fight. In any event, it seems as though your friend is in a particularly bad situation. This is why I recommend a very good lawyer, even if he has to borrow the money to pay him. Otherwise, he will be torn apart by the "dogs of justice" and his bones will be left to bleach in the sun. Sorry, I feel bad for him.

Once again, he needs a very, very good attorney. This is extremely important. It could save his life as he knows it. Also, remind him that he only needs one juror to sympathize with him and he could get a mistrial. And if he gets the majority of the jurors to sympathsize with him, he could probably get acquitted. I know if I was a juror on that case, I wouldn't vote to convict him of manslaughter. Maybe, and I say maybe, on not coming to a complete stop, if the state could prove it beyond a reasonable doubt, he may be guilty, but nothing else. Best of luck to him.

[thatoneguy00]

But then on the flip side of things, I had an uncle who was murdered with a shotgun in coldblood.they caught the guy he admitted to it, and he did seven years in prison. He is a free man today. So ya never know I guess its all in the mood that the judge is in too.

[Osborn F Enready]

Thanks Brien, and I too voiced about the same sentiment in response to his situation.

He has passed the hearing stage, and is now set for trial by jury.

His lawyer I have not met, but according to his brother-in-law, who I am friends with, he is a pretty honest, straight shooter type of lawyer......rare as they may be.

The lawyer was the one saying to "hope" for two years, so I doubt he is very confident in the case as compiled as of now.

I have had nightmares of being in similar situations..... it is a sad situation to be in.

thatoneguy00 said:
But then on the flip side of things, I had an uncle who was murdered with a shotgun in coldblood.they caught the guy he admitted to it, and he did seven years in prison.

I say:
While I don't know the specifics of the case, it seems like a light sentence, and I am sorry to hear about your loss.

thatoneguy00 said:
He is a free man today. So ya never know I guess its all in the mood that the judge is in too.

I say:
That is one of the things I despise in this system, is small court judge allowed, or accepted bias.

We have a city that is bordering ours, where the head judge presiding in civil traffic cases is a man who lost his daughter to a drunk driver. She was young, about 17 when she was killed I believe. Every single case he has tried that involves a traffic offense, God forbid anything having to do with alchohol, DUI or not, he deals in extremes as far as penalty issuance. He was the only judge I have stood before in my lifetime, where I actually contemplated jumping the little bannister between us and giving him a few elbow strikes to the head and neck area. I had to stand before him for a speeding, no-insurance charge, and actually had an argument with the man over the use and application of the word just. Truly, one of the biggest assholes I have ever witnessed wearing a robe.

I had another judge, from the Toledo Federal District Court whom I had the "honor" of meeting through indirect causation. I was employed by a local window cleaning company, and we did the Toledo Branch Federal Circuit Court. One of the terms of the contract is that the company notify the court a week prior to cleaning, so each of the branches of the office could notify their people to remove any items on the window, or in front of the window, that would block our duties to clean them, and we were to clean them without exception.

While doing one of the Judges private chambers windows (3rd floor), I had to exit and enter from his office to do the outside of several windows along that side of the building, as well as do his windows on the inside. Well the judge was not present, and his 3 foot deep marble window sills were covered in potted plants and knick-knack personal items, and there was no one available to move it, but me, so I did. While doing this, I knocked over one small potted plant, spilling a circle of potting soil about 3 and a half inches across. I picked it up after drying my hands, and replaced it as best I could, though there was a small remnant of particles in the carpet, to which I notified the escorting baliff, to notify their cleaning crew to assure it was cleaned up. An hour later, the baliff received a call to bring up "the window cleaner moron" who made a mess of his chambers. After being warned by the baliff that this judge was " a little out there " he led me into the chambers after getting permission to enter. As soon as the door closes, this asshole starts reaming me up and down in a tirade of insults, accusations and expletives that would make an ex-sailor as myself, blush. After he finished, he asked me what I had to say for myself.

(Restraining the physical, instinctual desire to lash out and physically correct this assault of disrespect and utter contempt for my being) I said, more or less that I had done my job as required, and that had he listened to the e-mail he received about clearing his window shelves and sills of personal belongings, this wouldn't have happened. I also told him that I notified the baliff to notify the cleaning crew, and that was the extent of my responsibility. I also told him I didn't appreciate his verbal assault, and that I was not his dog, and not to talk to me as such. There were more words exchanged, but at this time my memory fails to recall the exact words. Never the less, I was not reprimanded by my boss, nor would it have mattered, as the reaction would have still been the same.
The judge is an asshole, and everyone knows it, and joke about it. Yet he is still a judge, sitting everyday in federal court, deciding peoples fate......

Sad days are upon us.