Manslaughter the Beak says!

Tecumsehsbones

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
55,688
7,131
113
Washington DC
JLM said:
REality is not part of his vocabulary. As far as I'm concerned Vader is guilty of two charges of first degree murder. First degree can mean one of two things....................premeditated murder or murder committed during the commission of another crime...............arson is a crime and theft is crime.................Numbnuts can take his pick.
Click to expand...
Really? Your felony murder rule is first degree?

Wow. I thought we were harsh, and felony murder's only second degree hereabouts.
 
JLM

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
547
113
Vernon, B.C.
Tecumsehsbones said:
Really? Your felony murder rule is first degree?

Wow. I thought we were harsh, and felony murder's only second degree hereabouts.
Click to expand...


Apparently people who think they know more than I do tell me there is no such word as "felony" in Canada. I'm not sure how I knew what it meant. :) :) :) Anyway we have first degree........................murder committed with planning before hand OR murder committed during the commission of another crime, Second degree murder...............murder with intent but NO planning and Manslaughter..........killing with omission of intent or via a careless act..........................approximately. :)
 
IdRatherBeSkiing

IdRatherBeSkiing

Satelitte Radio Addict
May 28, 2007
14,624
2,378
113
Toronto, ON
JLM said:
Apparently people who think they know more than I do tell me there is no such word as "felony" in Canada. I'm not sure how I knew what it meant. :) :) :) Anyway we have first degree........................murder committed with planning before hand OR murder committed during the commission of another crime, Second degree murder...............murder with intent but NO planning and Manslaughter..........killing with omission of intent or via a careless act..........................approximately. :)
Click to expand...

The issue is that the part about guilty in commission of another crime was based upon section 230 of the criminal code. The Supreme Court struck that section down. So it is not there. That is why it is manslaughter.


Travis Vader verdict: what is Section 230 of the Criminal Code? | Globalnews.ca
 
gerryh

gerryh

Time Out
Nov 21, 2004
25,756
295
83
JLM said:
In spite of all that it was just reported on Global National News that there is absolutely no doubt that Travis killed the victims. The judge should get his knuckles rapped for his error, but his error is apparently a moot point as far as the proof of the crime is concerned.
Click to expand...


The judge found him guilty of manslaughter. That means he is guilty of killing them. So where was the error by the judge?
 
Last edited:
JLM

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
547
113
Vernon, B.C.
gerryh said:
The judge found him guilty of manslaughter. That means he is guilty of killing them. So where was the error by the judge?
Click to expand...


Apparently he was going by an old definition of First degree murder which included murder while committing another crime which was changed back in the 80s. I don't agree that the change made sense but I guess the law is the law!
 
petros

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
109,466
11,481
113
Low Earth Orbit
gerryh said:
The judge found him guilty of manslaughter. That means he is guilty of killing them. So where was the error by the judge?
Click to expand...

He could have nailed him for murder but he f-cked up quoting law that no longer has force or effect when instructing the jury.

Either way his *** is grass.
 
P

personal touch

House Member
Sep 17, 2014
3,023
0
36
alberta/B.C.
JLM said:
Ièm guessing if you apply common sense to the facts that are known in this case youèll draw the right conclusion. Finger prints donèt lie, cell phone records donèt lie, D.N.A. doesnèt lie, add to that motive and opportunity and you have the answer. If the forum idiot is as smart as he thinks he is he will have identified an alternate perpetrator, but I donèt hear him voicing it. Add to that unless the alternate perpetrator is a ghost heéshe would have left evidence such as finger prints, boot prints etc. etc. I wonder how the lawyer who is getting him off will feel when he commits another deadly crime.
Click to expand...
YFU,
You ****ed up!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom