Whats the charge?
Discussion
Ok a serious hypothetical one for all the lawyers here.
Walking along a cliff one day, you notice a man hanging from a tree root.
200 feet below him, the waves crash against the rocks, that will surely make a mess of him if he should fall.
You have easy access to him, it wouldnt endanger you to help at all and all it requires from you is the helping hand to ensure his life is saved.
But you dont help him, despite his cries, and a few minutes later he falls to his death.
Forget about moral judgements and ask what charge could be brought against yourself for deliberately witholding your help?
Then apply this scenario to our speed camera toting losers in the "partners"......Theyre doing the same thing: wilfully mismanaging resources in favour of making money and concentrating on the wrong reasons for accidents! Is there a charge to be brought against them? Can it be brought? If so, then lets do it. No more Mr Nice guys.
Just going back to our scenario for a second; Imagine the guy hanging from the tree root is Brunstrom...
......yeah i know...
But itd be nice to think a medal would be forthcoming... for services rendered to humanity...
:edited cos i cant spell for crap tonight!:
>> Edited by deltafox on Friday 14th October 19:26
Walking along a cliff one day, you notice a man hanging from a tree root.
200 feet below him, the waves crash against the rocks, that will surely make a mess of him if he should fall.
You have easy access to him, it wouldnt endanger you to help at all and all it requires from you is the helping hand to ensure his life is saved.
But you dont help him, despite his cries, and a few minutes later he falls to his death.
Forget about moral judgements and ask what charge could be brought against yourself for deliberately witholding your help?
Then apply this scenario to our speed camera toting losers in the "partners"......Theyre doing the same thing: wilfully mismanaging resources in favour of making money and concentrating on the wrong reasons for accidents! Is there a charge to be brought against them? Can it be brought? If so, then lets do it. No more Mr Nice guys.
Just going back to our scenario for a second; Imagine the guy hanging from the tree root is Brunstrom...
......yeah i know... But itd be nice to think a medal would be forthcoming... for services rendered to humanity... :edited cos i cant spell for crap tonight!:
>> Edited by deltafox on Friday 14th October 19:26
I don't think there could be any charge brought against the individual in your example:-
- It was inaction, not action;
- He owed no duty of care to the bloke hanging;
- He was not responsible for the bloke being there in the first place.
So...translate it to the SCPs, which are quangos not individuals...and it's a nice idea but about as likely as me winning the lottery jackpot twice in a row.
Sorry matey.
- It was inaction, not action;
- He owed no duty of care to the bloke hanging;
- He was not responsible for the bloke being there in the first place.
So...translate it to the SCPs, which are quangos not individuals...and it's a nice idea but about as likely as me winning the lottery jackpot twice in a row.
Sorry matey.
havoc said:
I don't think there could be any charge brought against the individual in your example:-
Im not so certain.
havoc said:
- It was inaction, not action;
True, but im sure ive seen/read/heard something that would put a legal duty on you to help as long as it didnt endanger yourself....as in the example.
havoc said:
- He owed no duty of care to the bloke hanging;
Addressed via the previous statement...maybe?
havoc said:
- He was not responsible for the bloke being there in the first place.
Again true. But, in my example, would he not have been responsible for failing to offer easy help to prevent this fellows death?
havoc said:
So...translate it to the SCPs, which are quangos not individuals...
Ah! But individuals (who set policy and targets) are what run these quango's. They dont run themselves. They have "managers" and "strategists" doing their dirty work.
Id venture that these are the people who should and could possibly be prosecuted.
havoc said:
and it's a nice idea but about as likely as me winning the lottery jackpot twice in a row.
"It could be you!"...
Just had a thought....added a change to their labels:
They are now the : Casualty Production Partnerships!
>> Edited by deltafox on Saturday 15th October 08:27
What if instead of a man hanging from a tree root, it's someone else who is about to throw him over - do you:
a) walk away and phone the police (knowing that the man will fall to his death, but the suspect will be arrested)
or b) whack the assailant from behind with a rock, killing him but saving his victim, which leads to your instant arrested for murder (as your life was in no way originally threatened when you chose to take a life).
Which do you do?
(Obviously hitting him a non-fatal blow or shouting at him to stop (aka 'reasonable force') will result in your death by joining said original assailant on the rocks below - but then anyone sensible would know that)
a) walk away and phone the police (knowing that the man will fall to his death, but the suspect will be arrested)
or b) whack the assailant from behind with a rock, killing him but saving his victim, which leads to your instant arrested for murder (as your life was in no way originally threatened when you chose to take a life).
Which do you do?
(Obviously hitting him a non-fatal blow or shouting at him to stop (aka 'reasonable force') will result in your death by joining said original assailant on the rocks below - but then anyone sensible would know that)
In (b) above DV it would depend on the amount of force used. A person is entitled to use reasonable force to :
defend himself, or
his property,or
ANOTHER PERSON.
He may also use such force as is reasonable in the circumstances in the prevention of crime.
The law, if such a thing did occur as you say, would take its course and the person assaulting aligned for possible manslaughter and found not Guilty by his Peers
far better than a stroke of pen and no trial and the implications that this could attract.
dvd
defend himself, or
his property,or
ANOTHER PERSON.
He may also use such force as is reasonable in the circumstances in the prevention of crime.
The law, if such a thing did occur as you say, would take its course and the person assaulting aligned for possible manslaughter and found not Guilty by his Peers
far better than a stroke of pen and no trial and the implications that this could attract.
dvd
So someone taking option 'b' would likely be tried for manslaughter but found not-guilty - which seems reasonable, though wouldn't such a charge leave them potentially remanded in custody, hence a consequence of their 'good deed' to fellow man would be their loss of their job, their friends, maybe wife, children taken into care, probably lose their home due to no mortgage payments - and then once found not-guilty being satisfied that they did the right thing, and as a consequence 'only' had their life completely ruined.
This is not a particularly unlikely scenario, I'm sure there are many situations where people have witnissed assualts, and there are some thugs so violent that unless you render them unconscious in the first blow with whatever is to hand (which may also be a fatal blow), then they would likely just get angry and you would become their next victim.
It would seem to be a big reason for taking option 'a', like many in the UK would these days.
This is not a particularly unlikely scenario, I'm sure there are many situations where people have witnissed assualts, and there are some thugs so violent that unless you render them unconscious in the first blow with whatever is to hand (which may also be a fatal blow), then they would likely just get angry and you would become their next victim.
It would seem to be a big reason for taking option 'a', like many in the UK would these days.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff