|
|
Post by Admin on Sept 1, 2020 19:03:18 GMT
www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-bristol-53982113What do you think of this? Not from a personal level, but a technical stand point? Does this mean he did attempt to murder someon but was insane? Was it still attempted murder but he was considered insane? In a murder case they used to say, 'guilty of murder but insane'. Is this the same thing? I am unsure whether to include it on the site or if it means he was cleared in the same way a person might be if it was self-defence.
|
|
|
|
Post by matthewspicer on Sept 1, 2020 19:17:45 GMT
"The Code for Crown Prosecutors provides that a realistic prospect of conviction includes a special verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity" .... www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/mental-health-suspects-and-defendants-mental-health-conditions-or-disordersSo he carried out the act (Can't see it in report but I think under the Human Rights Act (1998) there has to be a 'finding of fact' (in case he had pleaded not guilty i.e. 'I didn't do it')) - So in law a crime was committed - but .... special verdict of .... In the Criminal Statistics this would be recorded as attempted murder i.e. again a crime has been carried out .... It is the same for murder: that 'guilty but insane' was abolished in 1964 when it reverted back to the Common Law verdict of .... 'ngbroi' If u didn't include it then u would have to remove all cases of insanity .... (logically) - before hanging was abolished one in three murder cases ended in an insanity verdict - it would be literally thousands of cases .... Matthew:) |
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Sept 1, 2020 19:23:37 GMT
"The Code for Crown Prosecutors provides that a realistic prospect of conviction includes a special verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity" .... www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/mental-health-suspects-and-defendants-mental-health-conditions-or-disordersSo he carried out the act (Can't see it in report but I think under the Human Rights Act (1998) there has to be a 'finding of fact' (in case he had pleaded not guilty i.e. 'I didn't do it')) - So in law a crime was committed - but .... special verdict of .... In the Criminal Statistics this would be recorded as attempted murder i.e. again a crime has been carried out .... It is the same for murder: that 'guilty but insane' was abolished in 1964 when it reverted back to the Common Law verdict of .... 'ngbroi' If u didn't include it then u would have to remove all cases of insanity .... (logically) - before hanging was abolished one in three murder cases ended in an insanity verdict - it would be literally thousands of cases .... Matthew:) Thanks, that helps. These things drive me insane. |
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Sept 1, 2020 19:29:34 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by matthewspicer on Sept 1, 2020 19:53:05 GMT
.... but it then says next line ....
"A man accused of stabbing bystanders as he roller-skated down a street has been cleared of attempted murder by reason of insanity." .... by reason of insanity ....
By the logic of 'completely cleared' he would have left court and gone home .... Where ever he goes the file with him will say 'attempted murder' ....
Again looking at stats for 1900-1957 more killers were sent to Broadmoor, Rampton, Ashworth and secure mental hospitals than were ever sent to the gallows ....
m:)
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Sept 1, 2020 20:00:57 GMT
.... but it then says next line .... "A man accused of stabbing bystanders as he roller-skated down a street has been cleared of attempted murder by reason of insanity." .... by reason of insanity .... By the logic of 'completely cleared' he would have left court and gone home .... Where ever he goes the file with him will say 'attempted murder' .... Again looking at stats for 1900-1957 more killers were sent to Broadmoor, Rampton, Ashworth and secure mental hospitals than were ever sent to the gallows .... m:)
Cheers. Personally I dont really agree with the insanity rulings. I remember one judge saying something similar, noting that if a person was able to get up in he morning and tie their own shoes, then they were probably not insane. It frther states he was under the effects of drugs, or withdrawal. Again, thats similar to being under the influence of alcohol. The only defence I would afford him was that he was born with one arm. That would be quite upsettings I imagine. |
|
|
|
Post by matthewspicer on Sept 1, 2020 20:16:21 GMT
.... or perhaps a verdict of 'Found Insane' - I agree the 'not guilty' is not common sense which is why QV asked for the 'guilty but insane' - which legally is a contradiction ....
once hanging was abolished in 1957 and 1965, to some extent, the verdict lost most of its impact (after 1957 u also have manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility) .... bucket loads of killers before 1957 weren't really insane it was just that juries didn't want them hanged ....
m:)
|
|
|
|
Post by liferreilly on Sept 1, 2020 20:50:18 GMT
It's not the clearest article in the world is it? I think a person would be forgiven for thinking
that Bridgeman had walked free from the court after reading that.
"his family said it was grateful for the mental health care he had received since" That would indicate that
he's probably in a hospital somewhere. Useless article, but it is the BBc.
In the last paragraph they even refer to him as Mr Benjamin. Not even done a proof read.
I agree with you Admin when it comes to "insane" rulings.I used to work with people that were not of sound mind
so to speak.They had little to no capacity and had no responsibility for their actions.
There is a clear and distinct difference between those people and those that have "moments of madness" "psychotic
episodes" etc
If he'd have been born with one leg and was rollerskating down the street, then I'd concede he was probably insane!
|
|
|
|
Post by liferreilly on Sept 1, 2020 21:20:42 GMT
Footnote: It would be interesting to see some statistics comparing the types of crime committed
and the pleas entered by the accused. I think insanity/ diminished responsibility etc is
usually used when it comes to murder/manslaughter etc and sexual offences.
I don't think too many bank robbers would get away with dim/resp as an excuse for their crime.
Though you'd think a lot of murders and sexual attacks are carried out, with just as much planning
as some armed robberies.
|
|
|
|
Post by matthewspicer on Sept 1, 2020 22:05:29 GMT
Liferreilly
Diminished Responsibility is only available on a charge of murder [Homicide Act (1957)] .... having abolished the death penalty in 1965 it makes no logically sense to keep it, because d/r could be taken into account in the minimum term of the life sentence for murder ....
insanity is available for any crime - but again in realpolitik - it only was used as a defence to murder ....
matthew:)
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Sept 1, 2020 22:59:56 GMT
Footnote: It would be interesting to see some statistics comparing the types of crime committed and the pleas entered by the accused. I think insanity/ diminished responsibility etc is usually used when it comes to murder/manslaughter etc and sexual offences. I don't think too many bank robbers would get away with dim/resp as an excuse for their crime. Though you'd think a lot of murders and sexual attacks are carried out, with just as much planning as some armed robberies. This is the exact comment made by a judge in another case, but I cant remember which, in Scotland I think, in the 1950s or something? I think a father threw his children in a quarry lake. The judge refused to allow the plea of this 'new' deminished responsibility thing into account. I think it was him that commented on how its only murder cases where they do that, and not for shop lifting or other petty crimes. |
|
|
|
Post by liferreilly on Sept 1, 2020 23:32:26 GMT
Thanks Matthew
It can get a bit head scratchy at times! Take for instance Robert Napper:
Kills a mother and daughter in 1993. Is sentenced for murder (goes to Broadmoor)
Yet in 2008 it's manslaughter on dim/resp grounds for the 1992 Rachel Nickell killing.
Two murders and a manslaughter, in two cases just over a year apart. Doesn't make
sense to me. Napper's state of mind would've been off the chart for both sets of
killings you would think? Technically, do you think the Bisset murders should've been
Manslaughter on dim/r grounds also?
|
|
