A scenario from my A level law days...........
Discussion
Not sure if it was a real scenario or a made up one for the students to ponder over.
A lad, feeling suicidal, get a lift to the top of a block of flats with the intention of throwing himself off the roof. He gets to the ledge and finally jumps.
Unknown to him, there had been some building work going on a few floors down, and the builders had left a rubble net stretched out which he fell into.
However, as he passed one of the flat windows he was shot by a man with a shotgun. The man had been arguing with his wife, and their arguments always ended with him firing an ALWAYS unloaded shotgun at her. This time however, the shotgun was loaded, unknown to him, but he missed his wife anyway and the shot went out the window.
Then it turns out that the man and woman were the lads parents. The lad had fallen out with his mum, knew that his parents would argue about it, and loaded the gun himself knowing his dad would shoot the gun at her to resolve the argument.
Who therefore chaps, are guilty of what?
A lad, feeling suicidal, get a lift to the top of a block of flats with the intention of throwing himself off the roof. He gets to the ledge and finally jumps.
Unknown to him, there had been some building work going on a few floors down, and the builders had left a rubble net stretched out which he fell into.
However, as he passed one of the flat windows he was shot by a man with a shotgun. The man had been arguing with his wife, and their arguments always ended with him firing an ALWAYS unloaded shotgun at her. This time however, the shotgun was loaded, unknown to him, but he missed his wife anyway and the shot went out the window.
Then it turns out that the man and woman were the lads parents. The lad had fallen out with his mum, knew that his parents would argue about it, and loaded the gun himself knowing his dad would shoot the gun at her to resolve the argument.
Who therefore chaps, are guilty of what?
think that the answer was suicide.
The lad intended to kill himself, and succeeded.
The father didn't intend to kill his wife and didn't.
Odd.
Didn't know about the magnolia film, and can't find te transcript on 'Drew's scriptorama' It comes up with some russion site that doesn't work.
The lad intended to kill himself, and succeeded.
The father didn't intend to kill his wife and didn't.
Odd.
Didn't know about the magnolia film, and can't find te transcript on 'Drew's scriptorama' It comes up with some russion site that doesn't work.
If the lad lived.. attempted suicide and either accessory to manslaughter/ consipracy to commit murder.
No direct intent/ foresight of virtually certain consequences to kill or do gbh for the father so into the realms of manslaughter.
Not really gross negligence manslaughter in the orthadox sense, so left with unlawful act manslaughter.. However would a sober and reasonable person with the same knowledge as the father realise that his actions were likely to cause some, albeit not serious harm? There must be an unlawful act at least constituting a technical assault? Was there such an assault on the son? Did he apprehend the immediate application of unlawful personal force? There is no need for the unlawful act to be directed at the son. I think a conviction would fail at the objective test, however this would be left to the jury and they would decide whether the father deserved to be convicted or not, supposedly on this test, but undobutedly on other things too!
May even have just been considered an 'accident' in terms of the father such as r v lamb 1967 ?
Too many unknowns!
No direct intent/ foresight of virtually certain consequences to kill or do gbh for the father so into the realms of manslaughter.
Not really gross negligence manslaughter in the orthadox sense, so left with unlawful act manslaughter.. However would a sober and reasonable person with the same knowledge as the father realise that his actions were likely to cause some, albeit not serious harm? There must be an unlawful act at least constituting a technical assault? Was there such an assault on the son? Did he apprehend the immediate application of unlawful personal force? There is no need for the unlawful act to be directed at the son. I think a conviction would fail at the objective test, however this would be left to the jury and they would decide whether the father deserved to be convicted or not, supposedly on this test, but undobutedly on other things too!
May even have just been considered an 'accident' in terms of the father such as r v lamb 1967 ?
Too many unknowns!
Ah!!! No!......You are all in fact wrong.
The mother, in argueing with her son, had not respected his human rights, which had caused him much distress and driven him to suicide. Further more, The act of "moving" when faced with a loaded shotgun aimed at her by her husband, clearly resulted in the death of her son. Her husband was then so traumatised, that he has been unable to work since the incident and has claimed compensation.
Therefore, the result of the case would be: "Murder on two counts" and mental cruelty to her long suffering husband. Sent down for 25 years. The Judge summed up by saying: "We must defend society from people like you".
Well, This is Britain!
...................
The mother, in argueing with her son, had not respected his human rights, which had caused him much distress and driven him to suicide. Further more, The act of "moving" when faced with a loaded shotgun aimed at her by her husband, clearly resulted in the death of her son. Her husband was then so traumatised, that he has been unable to work since the incident and has claimed compensation.
Therefore, the result of the case would be: "Murder on two counts" and mental cruelty to her long suffering husband. Sent down for 25 years. The Judge summed up by saying: "We must defend society from people like you".
Well, This is Britain!
................... s2art said:
A complete guess would be:-
Lad, attempted suicide and conspiricy to commit murder.
Father, Manslaughter.
Eh?
About the same knowledge as the thread on wheelspinning where who is responsible for law was brought up by you
Attempted suicide is not an offence!
To be guilty of conspiracy, you need to plot something with someone else
You might be right about the father!
>> Edited by gone on Thursday 14th April 06:08
mungo said:Crikey! What's the offence of "being a tenant" in a block of flats? Is this another example of the criminal code expanding faster than society's ability to absorb it? - Streaky
The lad commited the offence of "being a t t"
PS - returning to the original question: where did they bury the survivors? - S
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff