A machete attack to head doesn't count as attempted murder??

Nope, it's the idiots who come up with the rules and regulations that are missing something. I think the idea of murder has to have some kind of 'cunning plan'! Spur of moment killings slot into manslaughter. Violence should be off the streets no matter whether there's a previous blueprint or not. Any death that is the result of a crime should not be treated leniently.
Murder is a Common Law offence, so the idiots who come up with the rules are judges.
Briefly, the law that was followed from c18th was that murder required intention to kill or intention to cause grievous bodily harm. In modern times it has been called into question whether intent to cause GBH was sufficient to sustain a charge of murder. The law commission recommended a new law under which: first degree murder required an intent to kill, second degree murder required an intent to cause GBH, and lesser intents would be Manslaughter. The difference would be in sentencing: mandatory life for first degree, discretionary life for second degree, and lesser sentences for manslaughter. The recs were never enacted, but prosecutors nowadays are reluctant to bring a charge of murder, unless there was evidence of a clear intent to kill. They tend to charge with malicious wounding or similar offences.
 
Murder is a Common Law offence, so the idiots who come up with the rules are judges.
Briefly, the law that was followed from c18th was that murder required intention to kill or intention to cause grievous bodily harm. In modern times it has been called into question whether intent to cause GBH was sufficient to sustain a charge of murder. The law commission recommended a new law under which: first degree murder required an intent to kill, second degree murder required an intent to cause GBH, and lesser intents would be Manslaughter. The recs were never enacted, but prosecutors nowadays are reluctant to bring a charge of murder, unless there was a clear intent to kill. They tend to charge with malicious wounding or similar offences.

I think it tends to slide back towards the best possible chance of a conviction. "He's murdered the poor bugger, but we might not get it to stick, so let's see if he'll plead guilty to manslaughter, GBH, a bit of rough-house, drunk and disorderly!"
 
I've done jury service twice, serving on seven cases in total. One juror was in his second week and insisted on being the foreman. He delivered a guilty verdict to the judge. We had to correct him and tell him the jury found the accused not guilty.

In the same case, two jurors hit it off with each other, and didn't discuss the case. They just sat back and chatted with each other. They gave their personal verdict at the start of the case, and wouldn't change their minds.

In the same case, the judge described the victim as 'defective'. He explained that this is a legal term which means the victim is of low mental capacity and is unable to make certain decisions for herself. The government / law in effect takes responsibility and acts in the person's best interests. The girl had Down's syndrome, and had sexual relations with an eighteen year old man. He was accused of rape. Two jurors said it was offensive to label the girl 'defective', and for that reason would not find the boy guilty.

In another case, a man received a television from another man at 3am, and said he had no suspicion that the TV was stolen. The jurors believed him.

Many jurors are unable to follow a case, yet failed to take notes of the salient points.

It was enlightening. I certainly wouldn't want to be at the mercy of one of our juries.
When my Father was on jury service he was followed from court to the Met by three lads and the lads got on the Met and looked at him until they got off.
 
If he'd killed him, it may well have been a manslaughter charge, based on the requirements for the charge of murder.

I don't think there is such a charge as 'attempted manslaughter', so charging him with both 'attempted murder' (i.e. did he intend to kill?) and 'wounding with intent' was probably the options they had as charges.
He certainly wasn't using a bloody big machete to stir his tea. Intent to kill or to cause GBH seems pretty obvious.
 
I did jury service and I concur I wouldn't like to be in the hands of some of the numpties on the jury I served on.
I can't speak for the UK, but in the States you have a choice of trial by jury of just before a judge. The common school of thought is, if you are innocent just have the judge hear from the case. If you're bang on guilty take the trial by jury.
 
Murder is a Common Law offence, so the idiots who come up with the rules are judges.
Briefly, the law that was followed from c18th was that murder required intention to kill or intention to cause grievous bodily harm. In modern times it has been called into question whether intent to cause GBH was sufficient to sustain a charge of murder. The law commission recommended a new law under which: first degree murder required an intent to kill, second degree murder required an intent to cause GBH, and lesser intents would be Manslaughter. The difference would be in sentencing: mandatory life for first degree, discretionary life for second degree, and lesser sentences for manslaughter. The recs were never enacted, but prosecutors nowadays are reluctant to bring a charge of murder, unless there was evidence of a clear intent to kill. They tend to charge with malicious wounding or similar offences.
Thank you for the insightful post. kind of puts some perspective on things for me at least. However part of the issue as i see it is how can you repeatedly and forcefully strike a person on the head and either claim you wernt intending to kill them or did not realise that you would be likely kill them? Ignorance appears to be no defence in so many other areas of the law. Hes now got an 10and half yr sentence unless he misbehaves and it will revert to the 16yr sentence. Im not sure why she didnt just stipulate a full 16yrs or longer, from my understanding she could have so what does it take to get a longer sentence?
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.