Man kills wife. Not murder (1 Viewer)

[Generator]

The abolition of provocation is not progressive. It forces the criminal justice system further to the right as it destroys the flexibility of the law. If a person is provoked they have no defence at all.

There are a number of situations where PROVOCATION ASSITS BATTERED WOMEN AGAINST CHARGES OF MURDER AGAINST THEIR ABUSIVE HUSBANDS...

I would have thought that your final point was blindinly obvious... I was merely trying to say that if supposed loopholes exist (what else could one think when you read through the judge's comments when sentencing for manslaughter, though I am aware that a jury upheld his 'provocation defence'), do you really expect people to be supportive of progressive reform when, in their mind, it seems as though the felon is being put before the victim?

 

[lukebennett]

Well thats when you have to read the cases...

An ordinary person takes into account the age of the accused. But nothing else.

the last two lines mean that the provocation doesnt have to be instant. This is to cater for women in abusive relationships. Research shows that women are less aggresive and are less likely to be provoked. Rather will the tension building up. Hence the provocation doesn't have to be immidate.

Provocation is a concession to MALE WEAKNESS...not female weakness. Men are more likely to react immdiately. Women less likely. Hence he defence is gendered. Therefore it has been widended to take into account battered women

Ie women may be subject to extensive abuse from their partners for 30 years....and then something small sets them off. It would be wrong to say that the women in such an abusive relationship should be charged with murder.

in the light that she was abused ,perhaps that was why she cheated considering it was not instant. she was provoked. does that make it any different? (im not arguing i just want to know)

 

[lukebennett]

Its irrelevant because she didnt kill him. The only matter on trial is his killing of her...

yeah but what i mean was that she had a reason to cheat and he was also plain violent in the first place. she may have left him cause she felt unsafe

yeah got a point. we dont really know more tha n whats in the papers or news

 

[Generator]

On a slight tangent... Asquithian, do you have any ideas, or do you know of any plans, to address the final line of my last post, i.e., do you really expect people to be supportive f progressive reform when, in their mind, it seems as though the felon is being put before the ovictim? I know that you noted a public relations problem in another thread, but has anyone actually made an effort to address the 'right-wing shift' at the popular level?

Edit: Asquthian, I really do appreciate the time tht you have spent answering any legal question that I happen to ask.

 

[Generator]

Yes, but has anyone tried explaining that to the public at large beyond an opinion piece in the Herald or The Age?

 

[budj]

Yes asqy you are right. As i have stated, my previous post was based upon subjectibvity. But i do vehemently believe that one person should have control over their reactions. (with the exception of the mentally ill).

To kill as a result of verbal abuse is stupid, and highlights the instability of this person. We should not base our selves upon the ghetto, werin we kill due to ego damage. From what i have heard from tabloid TV (therefore being unreliable so please correct if wrong), the women spoke words such as "sex with you is shit"<-- not exact quotes obviously, and i have another bf, etc etc. Does that provoke a kill? I mean, yes it would of damaged the mans ego, and central beleif in his own world,but killing is never the soution. As you can see ithas made things a lot worse of for him.

As far as i can see, through my unread unlawful undegree obtained eyes, provocation due to verbal absue should be abolished (asqy icannot be bothered to read the act, il read it later, right no i have to write a speech). That man could have easily just talked it through, nd realse that hiswife wasuseless, or something. But to kill due to being insulted should be considered murder (again note the words of subjectivirty).

Again note the subjectivity, not the objectivity with which I comment.

 

[neo o]

Every month or so the papers will churn out another "unjust" judicial decision. People become self righteous and demand blood. *shrugs*

 

[budj]

um...it has...provocation is not avaliable for 'words alone'...however words can only be a basis for provocation when they are violent in nature...ie...no one knows the total facts of this case. There is MUCH more to it.

Yes you are corect Asquithian. There is more to it, but the public can pretty much only make judgements from what has been presented.

Yes, we are not sure if the woman had a lash (physiclly) atthe man, or if she seriously made him monetarily disadvantaged. Further, there could have been a huge list of abuse culminating towards this event.

in conlcusion, i am in no way educated to make a judgement on the law. However i can say that the mans actions were unjust. Weather it be provoked (actually isn;t every action provoked b externa stimuli). The problem herein lies when he couldn't control his reaction.

 

[tattoodguy]

acquiestion............how do you know so much about law?


if you plan to kill someone for no reason -----------thats obviously fucked up, where as if you have alot of reasons etc, and someone pushes u into it.......thats obviously alot less severe.

the more flexibil8ity in our legal system the better.

i heard about a case.............i think he was an ex cop.........he killed someone i believe who raped or molested a family memmember or freind? ...................and he got let offf.............................

stufff like that ............makes sense to me..... ........is provaction the same as like temporary insanity? do u know of that case acquistian.

what about the security guard woman who shot the dude?????????????/ what do you think will happen there acquestian?

 

[budj]

Yes but isn't it a disadvantage o humanity, situations where reactions cannot be controlled. Shouldn't the law support us to "evolve" <--- Probably not the right word here, to greater citizens. Therefore abolishing provacation for such blank minded purposes as ego prtoection

But i acknowledge my ignorance in this case

 

[budj]

People are weak. But should be stronger. Its kinda like what occurs in the ghetto in the movie theatres, like someone shoots a man because they swore at him or something. You have to be much stronger.

If offenders are over punished, they shouldreally consider why they commited the offense in the first place.

 

[tattoodguy]

acquestrian - u have a good atttitude........what sort of law d you wanta go into?

how was that ex police case self defence???????

........in general acquestrian...............do you tend to find most sentences are toooo harsh or not harsh enuffff?

 

[joujou_84]

acquiestion, aquestrian, aquisition.............

 

[neo o]

PROVOCATION CANNOT BE BY WORDS ALONE....

Unless it was some sort of extreme homosexual advance