Epic WTF

A bit off thread, but it's been on my mind: someone was killed with a trench knife in the next street from me on Tuesday afternoon. Main road, with school kids and shoppers everywhere. Warning: bloody knife https://www.brixtonbuzz.com/2023/10/brixton-murder-huge-knife-seen-in-street-as-police-forensic-teams-examine-the-area-in-front-of-shocked-local-residents/

The dad breaking down in the street feet away from his son’s body is nsfl. Sadly the stabbings will continue while the #thuglife is glorified and ‘wholesome’ life opportunities are reduced through cruel policies and unequal market dynamics.

I don't see a dad breaking down in the link I posted.

Ah right, thought you’d linked another outlet that had the video spliced in with other scenes. Not something I’d have expected and definitely wished I hadn’t seen.

My mate was telling me about this today, one of his staff walked past the body on the way in to work. Made it sound like he'd been lying in the street for a while, I have no idea.

I lived on St Matthew's Road in the mid-noughties, one weekend we had two fatal knife attacks in two separate incidents on the same night, not a smart place to be when the clubs kicked out. Absolute mayhem most weekends.

Jesus F. Christ, I thought that was a spoof product. Cunts are out there actually selling and buying muscle enhancers for their (non-working) dogs. Even if the product is useless, what the heck is wrong with people.

.

What charges do you think would stick and what sort of sentence would you recommend for a 12-year old?

25 year ban? Life ban?

My bad, my frame of reference is Canada/USA.

There's a brutally pragmatic logic behind it.

https://twitter.com/mcandidate/status/1710604800604111044?t=J_IeygxWpt1JhGavtEH2IA&s=19

My bad, my frame of reference is Canada/USA.

And even with that qualification, you're still wrong in every one of your assertions in at least some of the 50-odd jurisdictions that includes.

(You might be right for 1st degree murder in some of them (though, if I read correctly, not under US Federal jurisdiction or the Canadian uniform code), but I CBA with more than a cursory google)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_in_United_States_law
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1111#a
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homicide_(Canadian_law)

Thug life.

From the actual Criminal Code of Canada

1 Attachment

From the actual Criminal Code of Canada

Er, and? Are you just posting random screenshots now? Is it that you actually think the bit you're showing us proves you're right?

S.229 says, among other things, that if you cause death while intending to injure the victim or any other person, or while committing an offence, then it's murder if you were reckless about the possibility of causing death. You don't have to intend to kill.

S.231 goes on, after the bit you've chosen to screenshot, to say that killing certain categories of people, or in the course of certain crimes, is first degree murder whether or not you'd planned it.

But you're right, linking to the actual criminal code is a bit more useful than Wikipedia's summary.
https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/c-46/page-34.html#h-119746

No. You have to prove intent to kill.
Intent to injure is not murder.
Also the intent to kill must be formed with a clear mind, not in the heat of a confrontation.
Intent to kill is extremely hard to prove, so prosecutors rarely use it unless they have definitive evidence that will convince a judge or jury

Writing this big old paragraph so emphatically incorrectly to try and dunk on someone else, including implying insight into the habits of prosecutors, then expecting us to believe you know off hand the criminal code of Canada, supported by cropped screenshots which have been misread/misunderstood/wilfully misinterpreted, all whilst not even understanding the basis of UK law is all pretty epic wtf from where I'm sat.

From my limited, but fairly relevant, experience (jury foreman on a South London knife crime trial for murder - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-41814124)

The judge was very specific with the requirements to reach a verdict of murder in our case

The requirements are

1. That it was a deliberate act
   
2. That it was unlawful (i.e. not in reasonable self defense)
   
3. That they intended to kill or cause serious harm
   
   

All three must be met

There is nothing about it being planned or premeditated - unless you want to infer that the 'intention' in 3 implies some sort of planning, which I wouldn't agree with.

It's why often you'll find the car park argument, punch thrown, someone falls and hits their head hard, aka 'one punch kills' are manslaughter rather than murder. Because while they are deliberate and unlawful, it is rare that the intention is to kill or cause 'serious' harm.

In the trial I referenced, there was no question about who had killed the boy, the question was around the circumstances

There were 2 charges
Murder
Possession of a weapon

Manslaughter was also a verdict available to us

I dredged up a Whatsapp chat after the trial was complete and have posted below - I know it's essentially an anecdote, but maybe illustrates that there's often some nuance

It doesn't mention any deliberations that were behind closed doors, just my interpretation at the time. Any names or details included were publicly available to anyone that was in the courtroom. 'Mali' was the victim, 'Lee' was on trial.
As @itsbruce says, it is brutally pragmatic at times and I genuinely believe that we made the only reasonable decision given the circumstances we were presented with.

1 Attachment

Fuck me, does anyone care?

I didn't bother reading much of the background. If there was a tiff or some point scoring over it beforehand then I missed it. But, yes, I do find the thresholds required to send people to prison for a long time fairly interesting. Maybe just because I had to sit and think about it for 3 weeks a little while ago.

And I think 'epic wtf' sums up teenage knife crime fairly well, so it seems on topic

That's a fascinating (to me, anyway!) account of the way the story and the situation is far more complicated and nuanced than ever appears in the reporting - and your logic behind the verdict seems clear.

(Way more serious than the couple of times I've been on a jury too, where both times it really felt that not even the CPS could be arsed)

This is genuinely beautiful.

I don't know what this is. Not work safe. https://twitter.com/Badenfella/status/1711328331080007830

Jesus is always so fuckable. Horny little demigod.

🤮