509
Jury unanimously acquits Churchill statue spray-painter (realmedia.press)
submitted 1 month ago by to c/unitedkingdom@feddit.uk
145 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 6 points 1 month ago (6 children)

Really? Then why are voluntary manslaughter, involuntary manslaughter, manslaughter 1, manslaughter 2, manslaughter 3, murder 1, and murder 2 all separate crimes, when (without motivation) the crime is just killing someone you weren't supposed to kill?

Kinda sounds like all those distinctions can be collapsed down to murder, right?

Why have varying sentences for crimes?

Matter of fact, why is mens rea even taught in law school?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] -2 points 1 month ago (5 children)

    That's murder where I fully agree that motivation is very important. That is one single action - killing a person.

    Juries don't pass sentences so varying sentences are not relevant here. This man's motivation should absolutely have been taken into account had he been convicted when passing his sentence.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (4 children)

    Oh. So which of the types of murder should he be convicted of, for accurate sentencing?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (3 children)

    What?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (2 children)

    Well. Someone died. You said the conviction requires no knowledge of motivation. Which of the 5-7 separate and distinct crimes of varying severity do we convict them of, and how do we decide without knowing motivation? (Like, "premeditated")

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •