judge has ordered Luka Magnotta to stand trial for first-degree murder

Sal

Hall of Fame Member
Sep 29, 2007
17,135
33
48
A Court of Quebec judge has ordered Luka Magnotta to stand trial for first-degree murder in the death of Concordia University student Jun Lin in May 2012.
Magnotta. 30, will also be tried on four other charges, including causing indignity to Lin's body, broadcasting obscene material, using the postal service to send obscene material and harassment of Prime Minister Stephen Harper and other members of Parliament.
A trial date will be set on April 29. Crown prosecutor Louis Bouthillier said a trial date is not likely before 2014.
"We were obviously very satisfied with the court's decision this afternoon," Bouthillier said outside the court. "I wish to salute the hard work done by the police officers in this case.
"They worked very hard, and there is still a lot of work to be done."
Magnotta, who was born in Ontario, pleaded not guilty and opted for trial before a judge and jury.
The weeks-long preliminary inquiry in the case wrapped up earlier today at the Montreal courthouse. Evidence presented at that hearing cannot be published because of a court-ordered ban.
Judge Lori Renée Weitzman, who heard from more than 30 witnesses in recent weeks, has ruled there is enough evidence to proceed to trial in the case.
Earlier this week, Magnotta's lawyer told the court that if his client is ordered to stand trial, it should be on a lesser charge.
Luc Leclerc, who is representing Magnotta, told the judge that the Crown must show that the killing was both planned and deliberate for a charge of first-degree.
He said based on his analysis, the judge cannot conclude the evidence presented at the hearing justifies that charge.
Magnotta stands accused in the killing and dismemberment of Lin, a Chinese national. He was arrested on June 4, 2012, in an internet cafe in Berlin, Germany, after an international manhunt.


Yahoo! News Canada - Latest News & Headlines
 

#juan

Hall of Fame Member
Aug 30, 2005
18,326
119
63
I know we are all supposed to have a right to a zealous defense, but it bugs the hell out of me that
the defense lawyer would argue that it couldn't be proven that the killing was planned and deliberate
like the killing and butchery was somehow an accident.
 

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
55,602
7,090
113
Washington DC
I'm sure it was a purely spontaneous dismemberment. I don't know how many times I've just been walking down the street, and suddenly been hit by the notion "Hey, wouldn't it be great to dismember somebody?" Just like a sudden craving for an ice cream. Only bloodier.
 

#juan

Hall of Fame Member
Aug 30, 2005
18,326
119
63
I'm sure it was a purely spontaneous dismemberment. I don't know how many times I've just been walking down the street, and suddenly been hit by the notion "Hey, wouldn't it be great to dismember somebody?" Just like a sudden craving for an ice cream. Only bloodier.
Yes your honour, "the man started bleeding and his body fell apart right in front of me, I don't know how it happened".
 

L Gilbert

Winterized
Nov 30, 2006
23,738
107
63
70
50 acres in Kootenays BC
the-brights.net
I know we are all supposed to have a right to a zealous defense, but it bugs the hell out of me that
the defense lawyer would argue that it couldn't be proven that the killing was planned and deliberate
like the killing and butchery was somehow an accident.
What? You don't think it's possible that someone could tie another person naked to a bed, repeatedly skewer him with an ice pick and a kitchen knife, dismember the poor bugger, let a dog eat part of him, etc. accidently or on the spur of the moment?
 

IdRatherBeSkiing

Satelitte Radio Addict
May 28, 2007
14,614
2,362
113
Toronto, ON
I know we are all supposed to have a right to a zealous defense, but it bugs the hell out of me that
the defense lawyer would argue that it couldn't be proven that the killing was planned and deliberate
like the killing and butchery was somehow an accident.

The lawyer's argument would be that Luc had no plan to kill Jun but did spontaneously or in a fit or rage and then grabbed the tools that just happened to be there and dismembered the body and mailed various parts to various politicians. But since there was no planning, the murder would not be 1st degree. The lawyers argument could go on to say that even as Jun's arm was removed, there was no intent to kill him and therefore it's not even 2nd degree murder but manslaughter as the death was accidental due to a missing arm.

The crown would contend that such an act could only be done with pre-meditation and obviously the judge agreed. A jury could still convict on 2nd degree or manslaughter if they didn't buy that it was planned.
 

L Gilbert

Winterized
Nov 30, 2006
23,738
107
63
70
50 acres in Kootenays BC
the-brights.net
The lawyer's argument would be that Luc had no plan to kill Jun but did spontaneously or in a fit or rage and then grabbed the tools that just happened to be there and dismembered the body and mailed various parts to various politicians. But since there was no planning, the murder would not be 1st degree. The lawyers argument could go on to say that even as Jun's arm was removed, there was no intent to kill him and therefore it's not even 2nd degree murder but manslaughter as the death was accidental due to a missing arm.

The crown would contend that such an act could only be done with pre-meditation and obviously the judge agreed. A jury could still convict on 2nd degree or manslaughter if they didn't buy that it was planned.
uhuh Like I said, how do you tie someone up naked to a bed, then take a kitchen knife and an ice pick to him, dismember him, let a dog eat parts of him, all on the spur of the moment?
 

#juan

Hall of Fame Member
Aug 30, 2005
18,326
119
63
The lawyer's argument would be that Luc had no plan to kill Jun but did spontaneously or in a fit or rage and then grabbed the tools that just happened to be there and dismembered the body and mailed various parts to various politicians. But since there was no planning, the murder would not be 1st degree. The lawyers argument could go on to say that even as Jun's arm was removed, there was no intent to kill him and therefore it's not even 2nd degree murder but manslaughter as the death was accidental due to a missing arm.

The crown would contend that such an act could only be done with pre-meditation and obviously the judge agreed. A jury could still convict on 2nd degree or manslaughter if they didn't buy that it was planned.

Oh well then, let's just let him off with a warning.. He's really a good kid....:roll:
 

karrie

OogedyBoogedy
Jan 6, 2007
27,780
285
83
bliss
The part of this case that bugs me is... he clearly wasn't mentally stable.

It's so obvious, that it bears a real possibility of seeing him let off for this with a year or two in a psych ward.
 

SLM

The Velvet Hammer
Mar 5, 2011
29,151
3
36
London, Ontario
The part of this case that bugs me is... he clearly wasn't mentally stable.

It's so obvious, that it bears a real possibility of seeing him let off for this with a year or two in a psych ward.

If that happens, the courthouse and/or Parliament Hill may get mobbed. And I may join them.

What's clear to me is that, irrespective if this guy is coo coo for Cocoa Puffs or not, this is clearly someone who should not be allowed to roam freely throughout society.
 

Sal

Hall of Fame Member
Sep 29, 2007
17,135
33
48
Agreed. He is not insane from a functioning vantage, but he is not sane either in that he is completely removed from his actions. We all have the ability to remove ourselves from our actions to a degree. It is the degree that makes the difference.