Manslaughter is NOT Murder
I'm amazed by the number of people who have said to me (up till now from just yesterday!!) - "this is why Sri Lanka needs the death penalty - cos the courts don't give good judgments! Did you hear that the murderer in the Jonsson case got only 12 years jail time and a fine??"
Why do people take what one person says and run instead stopping to find out the facts??
The guy who was found guilty of killing the Jonsson girl in SL was not found guilty of murder. He was found guilty of "culpable homicide" - this is what is more commonly known as manslaughter.
YES, there is a difference.
Prosecution must show intention (=mens rea) to prove murder as opposed to manslaughter. Manslaughter is, in simple terms, where a killing happens, but without intention to kill. Of course this is a subjective element - though generally it's decided on the principle of "would a reasonable person..." which is meant to minus the subjective element.
However, in manslaughter too there could be intention present - called voluntary manslaughter - where there is a mitigating factor in the relevant facts such as provocation as opposed to involuntary mansalughter where the killing is due to, say, negligence.
In the Jonsson case, the judges found that the prosecution was not successful in showing intention and hence the final judgement of manslaughter - hence the sentence of 12 years + fine. If murder had been found - yes, life/ death sentence. (Please note that nowhere on this blog have I said that the judgment is right/ wrong - this is merely a clarification of the facts as they stand now.)
It's annoying when you have to point these little things out to people not cos they don't/ didn't know (which is fair), but cos they didn't actually find out the facts of the case or the judgment - and are merely angry cos they heard from someone else that a murderer in SL got only this. One of these days, I swear, I will murder (mens rea present!) one of these fuckwits out of sheer irritation (although I wonder if it would hold up in court if my defence were to plead involuntary manslaughter with the provocation factor being idiot-cy of killed party??)
11 comments:
I say.. Capital punishment Should be introduced in SL.. not primarily as a method of punishment.. but instead as an effort to control crime in SL.
There are many areas in which crimes are commited.. and unfortunately all are not treated equally. It is a known fact that a status gets anyone somewhere with influence.
Yet nevertheless.. capital punishment as an effort to control crime will help people think twice about premeditated crimes.
As for what happens at the spurr of the moment.. They will unfortunately be judged.. lenient or otherwise.. become the example for the rest of society.
it is a controvercial issue.. but in my honest words.. i hate
This has nothing to do with what I said in my blog, but I will say it here anyway.
Let me clarify what you're saying: you've said "it is a known fact that a status gets anyone somewhere with influence" and then you've said capital punshment would "control crime."
(1). Are you saying the death sentence would wean out corruption?
And
(2)How would capital punishment "control crime"??
I dont want to talk about the specifics of the case, i largely agree with the post, and comment by manshark.
But for the record Sri Lanka DOES have Capital punishment as law, death penalty included.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_Sri_Lanka
And here I was waiting for a chance to meet with me lawyer friends, to ask em what the hell is this verdict.
Well Kudos to you mate, for pointing all this shit out, for the less afluent folks like me.
Just wandering whether this was a Big Lawyer, ran over small towner case? or Did our Chappies at Law Enforcement screw up? (Tampered Crime Scene? - Bits of CSI comming through)
i think i understand the difference between murder and manslaughter but i wonder if this chap will even serve the full 12 years?
Capital punishment is fun. You get chance to kill other people how have killed other people. Isn’t that fun? I mean killing people? I mean killing people without worrying you may get caught?
Well. I’m not trying to say killers and we are the same when it comes to killing people. Because we offer last meal before we kill people. I mean we even give him chance to select his last meal. Aren’t we good?
By the way how about if the person could not decide his last meal?
Do we postpone the killing till he decides his last meal? What happen if some one poisons him in his last meal? Do we kill the person who poisons him or we pay him for job well done?
What happen if the person got sick his last night? Do we wait till he get well or we kill him anyway?
How about if we need to kill a pregnant woman? Do we wait till she give birth and then kill her? Or we kill her anyway in the first place?
How about after the killing we found out if we kill the wrong person? Then do we hang the Judge and the Jury? Or just say ‘Oops! Sorry!’
If there are two people to be killed – then can we get them to fight like gladiators? I mean they have to die anyway – can’t we get any use of that?
Just my crazy thoughts.
My advice for everyone who planning to kill – kill big – I mean kill like bus full of people or train full of people – use suicide bombs. Then we won’t kill you for killing – then we will treat you better than anyone else even we give you helicopter rides if needed. But if we kill small – then we will kill you.
i couldnt read anyones comments. guess i d be on of your targets then - been the irritating bunch that questions. lol. what to do, i m not lawyer or student of law...but everyone changes, hopefully after his sentence he ll change to be a better person. like paul in the bible - was a murderer at first - manslaughter thingy i dont know - but he ended up been a great man of god! : )
Just to clarify why I was annoyed when I wrote this blog - NOT cos of people who don't know and ask/ question why - this is normal and welcome. I'm glad u found my blog a good starting point to clear things up ;o)
I was annoyed cos so many people used this judgment to support their arguemnts on why "the country is going to the dogs cos the justice system is crap." If that's what they believe - fine, but use proper facts to support the argument rather than pouncing on something completely irrelevant as an example of what they are trying to prove.
i hear you manshark. i hate people who go on and on complaining about issues - from politics to why the sl cricketers wear the sun screen.
my thing is and i think you said it too - if you dont want to get involved and make the change yourself - then you better not complain.
i remember a time when they said ' college was going to the dogs ' well the reason the college is going to the dogs is because non of the so caled loyal old boys get involve with it...totally different focus but anyway, you get me point. lol.
hey, love the way you write..it's funny and makes sense at the same time..which is not a combo you get too often...murder, manslaughter and mens rea brought back memories of last may when i was frantically trying to stuff all of that into my poor little head..scarred me for life, it did...:(
bugger me... and all this time i thought that manslaughter was some srilankanism like ladiesfingers...
...and to think that we believed it to be a crime all these years!
(runs off to tell everyone that its okay to laugh)
Post a Comment