Less jailtime for minimalist murderers

J

Jock04

Registered User
Messages
338
Just heard on the radio that the Law Reform Commission want to do away with the mandatory life sentence for murder, apparently on the grounds that "some cases only involve a little violence".

It was enough to kill someone!


I can only hope that in providing only a headline, the station has misinterpreted the news release.

"Ah sure, it was only a gentle bit o' murder. Just enough to kill the fecker. No need to be jailing them now"

Little wonder there's so little respect for the law in some circles.
 
An example I heard was "accidental death resulting from one punch" stuff like that.

I can see the reasoning but broadly speaking, I think it's a move in the wrong direction and would probably cause huge headaches and lengthy defences re expert reports etc for appealing lesser sentences.
 
"accidental death resulting from one punch" should not be regarded as 'murder'. To be guilty of murder requires both the planning (mens rea) aswell as the act (actus reus). So only in the case where the punch was intended to kill would the person be guilty of murder. Therefor the death would not be "accidental".

Accidental death could be regarded as manslaughter. But murder it is not.
 
Have you tried reading what the LRC actually said about this matter as opposed to what was reported?

[broken link removed]

[broken link removed]
"Ah sure, it was only a gentle bit o' murder. Just enough to kill the fecker. No need to be jailing them now"

Little wonder there's so little respect for the law in some circles.
Click to expand...
No - at least not in circles in which people take what's reported in the media as a full and fair reflection of actual events on foot of which they engage in kneejerk extreme reactions.
​
 

Yes, but I was referring to the whole picture - reforms on categories of manslaughter are also proposed e.g. "assault causing death"
 
ClubMan said:
Have you tried reading what the LRC actually said about this matter as opposed to what was reported?
Click to expand...

No, haven't had time yet. However, I did say

Jock04 said:
I can only hope that in providing only a headline, the station has misinterpreted the news release.
Click to expand...

kind of in the hope that the headline was misleading & in the hope that someone who had digested the full statement would give a more accurate assessment.
I still stand by my point that weak sentencing is a poor deterrent.
 
Getting rid of mandatory sentencing surely allows more discretion in terms of imposing lower or higher custodial sentences based on the plea, evidence, precedent etc.?
 
Possibly, although you might wonder how to impose a higher sentence than "life". I really don't know - would sentencing someone to 30 years -and they get 25% remission - really mean they spend more time in prison than someone who is sentenced to life & gets released after the "typical" 12 years? I know the "lifer" is out on licence, which can be revoked, whereas the 30-year man's sentence is complete, but still.........

I've had a very quick scan through the 145 pages, and I fully accept there's much more to the statement than a radio headline would lead you to believe (no surprise there!),
However, when public perception -as far as I can see- is that our judicial system seems to be little deterrent to anti-social behaviour of all levels, the thrust, and timing, of this report seems to be ill-advised.

I'm quite willing to be "educated" on this, though.
 
ClubMan said:
Getting rid of mandatory sentencing surely allows more discretion in terms of imposing lower or higher custodial sentences based on the plea, evidence, precedent etc.?
Click to expand...


I agree but the flip side then is that it probably opens the door to more appeals since sentancing might be based on a judges subjective opinion and the court of public opinion. Haven't read the submissions though so not sure what exactly they are proposing.
 
I love the title of this thread - it makes me think of aesthetic artistes working hard to arrange stylish murders that are stripped down to their most fundamental features....

"Julian, darhhling, don't you think the knife was a bit much? I would have gone with a garotte myself, so much more.... emblematic of the line between life and death, without all that cleaning up..."
 
Considering how ‘till now our judges have flouted the will of the people, as expressed through the legislation passed by their government, and ignored mandatory sentencing I would be slow to give them even more leeway in this regard. That said I have not read the report so cannot comment on its substance.
 
Last edited:
probably meant 'our judges till now etc.

in uk the judges can make a recommendation of the minimum sentence a person convicted of murder has to serve. I would welcome that change being brought in here as no matter how terrible all murder some are more worthy of longer sentences than others. also if they are thinking of changing the law in regard to a single blow death then maybe they might also have a recommendation of the minimum sentence to be imposed in the case of a guilty verdict. Just because its not actual 'murder' doesn't mean the culprit is a beacon of virtuosity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register