A legal quandry,

Tags : None
  • How true it is I have no idea yet!.

     

    From an American Television program.

     

    'A' murders 'B'' by administering poison.  'B' dies in bed,  'C' a disgruntled lover, enters the bedroom and shoots 'B' in the head,

    The question is can 'C' be charged with attempted murder?

    Logically one cannot be charged with attempting to murder a dead person, but if 'C' did not know 'B' was allready dead, surely then the intention is still there.

    Cristine Jennifer Shye.  B/L.  B/Acc
    This post was edited by Cristine Jennifer Shye. BL at May 25, 2016 8:25 PM BST
      March 28, 2016 3:28 PM BST
    0
  • But A did know B was dead because A murdered B with poison. As for C? Well just lock C up because surely shooting dead people is very cruel , they already died once and thats just rubbing it in.

     

    Case closed lol :)

      March 28, 2016 5:20 PM BST
    0
  • The intention is to kill but someone already dead cannot be murdered. It would be feasible to charge them with 'assault' or some such as there must be a law against assaulting, mutilating or doing whatever to a dead body. 

    Was A actually dead? Is it possible after autopsy that they could have survived the dose of poison? If so, both A and C must be charged. Interesting case; I wonder how it will turn out. 

    Every woman is beautiful, some show it with their faces, others show it with their hearts.
      March 28, 2016 6:16 PM BST
    0
  • Yes it was proved that 'B' had expired some time before, by autopsy.    UK law a person cannot obviously be charged with murder of a dead person, but my interpretation and the basis of a charge would have to be the intent and proving that 'C' did not know that 'B' was already dead, but attempted murder surely that is a viable option?.   Attempted murder is the intention or actions that would deprive some person of life. ie. beating someone or inflicting injuries that could reasonably be expected to kill someone.

     

    I have to do 5 scenarios for a paper I am submitting.

    Cristine Jennifer Shye.  B/L.  B/Acc
    This post was edited by Cristine Jennifer Shye. BL at March 23, 2018 5:10 PM GMT
      March 28, 2016 6:40 PM BST
    0
  • With respect, I think some of you are getting your letters mixed up!

    A is guilty of murder

    B is dead

    C shot B in the head, and if it could be proved that they did not know that B was already dead then it follows that C attempted to murder B.

    C is guilty of attempeted murder in my opinion, otherwise the law is an ass.

    xx

      March 28, 2016 7:17 PM BST
    0
  • Then the law is an ass, lol, 'C' cannot in law be charged with  murder, a person who is already dead.   Murder by definition is depriving someone of life, if they are already dead, then the attempt does'nt come into it.   Lucy is thinking on the same lines as I am, proving that 'C' did not know 'B' was already dead, logical, otherwise why would they bother going to the trouble of shooting a person who is already dead.

    Cristine Jennifer Shye.  B/L.  B/Acc
    This post was edited by Cristine Jennifer Shye. BL at March 23, 2018 5:12 PM GMT
      March 28, 2016 7:28 PM BST
    0
  • Just lock them all up dead or not. A murdered B and C murdered the dead one not knowing the dead one was dead because why would anyone shoot a dead person?

    A is a murderer and C is and as B cannot speak so B could be too. Put all 3 in the same cell with the smell.

     

    Best not put my answers in any paper you will fail lol.

      March 28, 2016 7:38 PM BST
    0
  • Yes, thought so...

    Well, it just seems to me that attempted murder is when you try to murder someone but fail, C attempted to murder B but failed. The reason for the failure does not remove the attempt.

    Are they guilty of any other offence then? Like Julia says, you can't go round shooting dead bodies in the head!

    Surely going out with a gun with the intention of killing someone is at least a little bit naughty?

    xx

      March 28, 2016 7:44 PM BST
    0
  • If anyone shoots someone in the head thinking they were alive then the intent is to kill them , if C shot B in the foot then that would be different.

    The moral to this is to not mix with people called A B or C , you have a very high chance of ending up dead.

      March 29, 2016 6:50 AM BST
    0
  • I still believe that the intent to commit murder is the basis for the charge. Whether it was unsuccessful or not the idea was to kill the person. It would have to come down to unquestionable evidence that murder was intended and they did not already know that the perosn was already dead. Difficult to prove. 

    Every woman is beautiful, some show it with their faces, others show it with their hearts.
      March 29, 2016 3:27 PM BST
    0
  • Nikki I have spoken to 2 barristers, whilst not dealing in the field of criminal law, they threatened to get back to me,  Why would someone put themselves at any sort of risk to shoot somone who'm they knew was allready dead? my contention, the intended murder of someone they believed at the time was not dead.    Still comes down to can a person face a charge of attempted murder of a dead person.

    Cristine Jennifer Shye.  B/L.  B/Acc
      March 29, 2016 4:10 PM BST
    0
  • https://youtu.be/Rowg8tO34Vc

    Shoots dead mum in the head lol.

     

    This post was edited by Former Member at March 29, 2016 8:17 PM BST
      March 29, 2016 8:04 PM BST
    0
  • There is a scenario you may not have taken into account Cris;

    C maybe trying to protect A & knew full well that B had expired and attempted to muddy the waters as such by shooting them in the head...

     

    Not to borrow the strength of another, nor to rely on one's own strength; to cut off past and future thoughts, and not to live within the everyday mind... then the Great Way is right before your eyes. - Yamamoto Tsunetomo
      March 29, 2016 9:21 PM BST
    0
  • Well Matt, I had considered that, if that was proved, that would be easy, thats pervertng the course of justice.   I'm thinking that it was attempted murder just to make it more interesting and a problem for the DPP

    Cristine Jennifer Shye.  B/L.  B/Acc
    This post was edited by Cristine Jennifer Shye. BL at March 29, 2016 9:50 PM BST
      March 29, 2016 9:48 PM BST
    0
  • The bigger headache would have been if A had poisened B & just as B is expiring C appears into the room shooting B in the head. Ensuring that B was dead......

    How do you prove what Killed B??

    Not to borrow the strength of another, nor to rely on one's own strength; to cut off past and future thoughts, and not to live within the everyday mind... then the Great Way is right before your eyes. - Yamamoto Tsunetomo
      March 29, 2016 9:56 PM BST
    0
  • Hi Cris,

    I suspect that this is the kind of situation which led to the drafting of the Criminal Attempts Act 1981. Section 1(2) of the Act specifies that "a person may be guilty of attempting to commit an offence to which this section applies even though the facts are such that the commission of the offence is impossible". Thus, even though the defence of impossibility prevents conviction for the murder of an already-dead victim, section 1(2) would open the charge of attempted murder, provided that:

    * the culprit had the intention to commit the offence

    and

    * performed an act which was more than preparatory to the commission of the offence.

    In the instant case, as has been pointed out above, there's a strong inference that the culprit's actions suggest an unawareness of the victim's previous demise, and thus an intention to commit murder. A bullet in the brain probably counts as more than preparatory.

    Hugs,

    Judith

      May 25, 2016 8:00 PM BST
    0
  •  

    Bit late with my findings, Judith beat me to it.

    1 Attempting to commit an offence Criminal Attempts Act 1981

     

    (1) If, with intent to commit an offence to which this section applies, a person does an act which is more than merely preparatory to the commission of the offence, he is guilty of attempting to commit the offence.

    (2) A person may be guilty of attempting to commit an offence to which this section applies even though the facts are such that the commission of the offence is impossible.


    (b) if the facts of the case had been as he believed them to be, his intention would be so regarded,

    then, for the purposes of subsection (1) above, he shall be regarded as having had an intent to commit that offence.

    (4) This section applies to any offence which, if it were completed, would be triable in England and Wales as an indictable offence,

    4 Trial and penalties

    (1) A person guilty by virtue of section 1 above of attempting to commit an offence shall -

    (a) if the offence attempted is murder or any other offence the sentence for which is fixed by law, be liable on conviction on indictment to imprisonment for life; and

    Cristine Jennifer Shye.  B/L.  B/Acc
    This post was edited by Cristine Jennifer Shye. BL at May 25, 2016 8:31 PM BST
      May 25, 2016 8:22 PM BST
    0
  • So... the law is not an ass?

    Yaay!

    xx

      May 25, 2016 11:56 PM BST
    0
  • Fortunately for B, they get off scott-free:     Suicide is defined as the act of intentionally ending one's own life. Before the Suicide Act 1961, it was a crime to commit suicide, and anyone who attempted and failed could be prosecuted and imprisoned, while the families of those who succeeded could also potentially be prosecuted.   Perhaps the law, Sir, is not always an ass.

    "A live lived in fear is a life half-lived." - Native American proverb. "Inside every man is a woman who was drowned in testosterone before birth". - Wendy Jeanette Larsen "It is better to be hated for what you are than loved for what you're not." - Andre Gide (French writer)
      May 27, 2016 2:31 AM BST
    0