Criminal law question
- Thread starter kid79
- Start date
I believe its based on intent
but 1 of the legal beagles on here can explain it better
Second degree murder is defined as all other murder other than first degree murder. So, if you do not plan and you do not deliberate about it but you still intend to kill someone, that is second degree murder. The sentencing ranges from life in jail with no parole for 10 years to 25 years until you are eligible for parole. If there are mitigating factors the jury can recommend the minimum.
If somebody is committing an illegal act and causes the death of an individual then they are found guilty of manslaughter. Though the person died, there was no intention to cause death. Perhaps, there was only an intention to hurt someone but if a person dies because of that criminal act, the charge is manslaughter. The sentencing options for manslaughter are very complicated because there is no minimum. You can get anything from probation (which is unlikely) to life in jail. Often individuals found guilty of manslaughter will serve medium range penitentiary terms, in the neighbourhood of 7 to 15 years.
Those are definitions and as I said I think its based on intent
but 1 of the legal beagles on here can explain it better
Second degree murder is defined as all other murder other than first degree murder. So, if you do not plan and you do not deliberate about it but you still intend to kill someone, that is second degree murder. The sentencing ranges from life in jail with no parole for 10 years to 25 years until you are eligible for parole. If there are mitigating factors the jury can recommend the minimum.
If somebody is committing an illegal act and causes the death of an individual then they are found guilty of manslaughter. Though the person died, there was no intention to cause death. Perhaps, there was only an intention to hurt someone but if a person dies because of that criminal act, the charge is manslaughter. The sentencing options for manslaughter are very complicated because there is no minimum. You can get anything from probation (which is unlikely) to life in jail. Often individuals found guilty of manslaughter will serve medium range penitentiary terms, in the neighbourhood of 7 to 15 years.
Those are definitions and as I said I think its based on intent
There is no finding/verdict of "innocence". Just Guilty or Not Guilty. Or a "hung"jury where there is not a unanimous verdict.
Then the police should decide before court which charge is appropriate and the courts decide if guilty or not guilty. Which comes to my original question, can the courts find you guilty of manslaughter when you were charged with murder? Where you were found not guilty of murder because of "no intent" or "self defence"
The replies in this thread are wrong and laughably so
There is no "failsafe"
If Crown charges you with 2nd degree murder and does not prove their case you are not guilty
They can't simply convict on a lesser offence!
If that foolishness was actually law then it would be far simpler to charge everyone with 1st degree murder and let the chips fall wherever as jury decides what the crime was
There is no "failsafe"
If Crown charges you with 2nd degree murder and does not prove their case you are not guilty
They can't simply convict on a lesser offence!
If that foolishness was actually law then it would be far simpler to charge everyone with 1st degree murder and let the chips fall wherever as jury decides what the crime was
My head is spinning
Your def is just so wrong
The term I think you were looking for is culpable vs non-culpable
Intent is meaningless (and pretty much impossible to prove anyways)
An accident, mistake, stupidness, etc is NOT a defence and would still result in 2nd Degree Murder (with three notable exceptions, two of which ups it to 1st Degree and one of which drops it to Manslaughter)
Fighting could certainly be murder
His only valid defence would be heat of passion due to the sudden provocation (assuming other guy was the aggressor)
It's the Crown who decides what charges get tried in court, not the police. Indeed they do decide beforehand which charge is appropriate. Based on the evidence they will present, they go for the toughest charge they think they can convince the jury to convict on.
In a case that turns on the jury's finding about intent, the Crown may well argue that a verdict on manslaughter should be considered on the evidence as presented, if the jury decides not to convict on murder. The Defence gets to argue against that (just as they got to argue against the original murder charge) and the judge determines if the law permits it, and instructs the jury whether they can do so, and on what basis.
Simplified: Any culpable homicide is at least manslaughter. If the killing was deliberately plotted and/or carried out as a criminal act, then that culpable homicide is first degree murder. If it wasn't first degree but still in some degree criminal or deliberate, then it's murder in the second degree. So the Crown's first step is always to prove there was a culpable homicide, and connect the accused as the agent of it. Then they get to matters of intent and degree.
Really....
Those definitions were taken from a March 25, 2008 interview with Bruce Engel, Criminal Lawyer with Engel and Associates, an Ottawa, Ontario Criminal Law Firm.
If a person was charged with first degree murder can the prosecutor ask the jury to consider second degree murder if they dont think it was first degree?
No lawyer ever posted what you said but I notice you do not include any link / source for your outlandish claims
On top of what thumper, OJ and oagre said, I imagine that there could be a plea deal that would lower the charges.
BTW, do you think that thumper made up the date and details of that interview?
