Is killing an abusive partner murder?

[panther]

Killing an abusive partner in cold blood could result in a conviction for a crime other than murder under recently published Government proposals. Do you think that this makes sense?

IMO, if ya kill someone then ya should be done for manslaughter or murder!

[emamum]

Killing in cold blood then yes, A friend i used to have killed her abusive husband and was convicted because she snapped one night while he was asleep and stabbed him, he died instantly.........
it has to be different if its self defence tho.

[MargaretR]

The way I read it was that the charge of manslaughter would be used.
Long term mental abuse can warp reasoning.
I think anyone who hasn't been subjected to it can't make an informed comment on it.

[Bonnyboy]

Anyone who is manipulative enough or has enough cash to hire a top defence lawyer are bound to exploit this. You can’t have a certain set of criteria which allows you commit murder without any comeback. It’s a nonsense

Isn’t there enough confusion as to sentencing already. Lets get the present system right before messing around. If someone gets a 5 year sentence, make the buggers do the full term, no time off for good behaviour. I don’t even think half of our Judges know what they should be dishing out as a sentence to a particular crime.

[Eric]

This is a touchy question: A large percentage of murder victims in Canada are women (and sometimes their children) killed by their abusive male partners, or jealous ex-partners. But sometimes, a victim of prolonged abuse will fight back, anyway she can... I belive that each incidence of this kind of crime, must be viewed on its own "merits."

[WillowTheWhisp]

Haven't there already been cases of mitigating circumstances where the charge has been reduced to manslaughter?

[Margaret Pilkington]

Originally Posted by [email protected]

The way I read it was that the charge of manslaughter would be used.
Long term mental abuse can warp reasoning.
I think anyone who hasn't been subjected to it can't make an informed comment on it.

While I agree largely with what Margaret has posted.......I think that if the killing is pre-meditated/planned, then the charge should be murder......if the killing is done in a moment of derangement/anger/fear.......self defence should be a good argument against a conviction of Murder.

[Eric]

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington

While I agree largely with what Margaret has posted.......I think that if the killing is pre-meditated/planned, then the charge should be murder......if the killing is done in a moment of derangement/anger/fear.......self defence should be a good argument against a conviction of Murder.

But isn't that the way it is

[cashman]

to me murder is murder its that simple, manslaughter is when there was NO intent to kill, of that i'm near sure, wheres blazey when ya need her? i do think there is differant types/degrees as the yanks call it, so there must be different tariffs, killing n abusive partner should not come under the same banner as premeditated or killing fer killings sake, i agree with eric,each one should be looked at individually, and judged on that basis. thats my 2 pennorth.

[SamF]

Originally Posted by WillowTheWhisp

Haven't there already been cases of mitigating circumstances where the charge has been reduced to manslaughter?

Several, the changes in the law wont really make much difference - post Alluwahliah(probably spelt it wrong) many battered wives have been able to use the defence of provocation - which will reduce murder(mandatory life) to voluntary manslaughter(maximum life - giving the judge some flexibility in sentencing) The partial defence of provocation usually requires an action - things said or done that will cause D a sudden and temporary loss of control - so that they are not the master of their own mind. In Alluwahliah Lord Taylor said that in such a case (a battered wife burned alive her drunken, sleeping husband) cummulative provocation had occured - over the years the provocation had built up and the "last straw" of him turning up drunk and threatening her that night was enough to count as provocation - reducing her sentence of murder to voluntary manslaughter.

Not the best written as I'm struggling to rememeber - i did the exam in january haha but yea I did one of my modules in A level law on murder/voluntary manslaughter and it's defences and we did a fair bit just on cases involving battered wives - I'll check back on this topic in the morning when I'll be able to give a clearer, better written comment heh....

[steeljack]

just a back door way of letting in the defense of "honour Killing" , if a spouse can be said to suffer from psychological torture and it justifies killing , the next logical step is that family members (fathers and brothers) can suffer from the same condition .

[BERNADETTE]

I take it that "in cold blood" means premeditated if so it should be murder. Seems to be another way to reduce charges and the real victims will be the abused partners who actually do snap. We aren't just talking about women here, lots of men are in abusive relationships as well.

[Benipete]

Don't know if it's true but just heard that a person was murdered and the killers filmed him/her dying.If it is true then that must rank as the worse ever murder.Hope it's not true but it was on MSN

[mani]

nope its not murder if u can prove beyond reasonable doubt that this was the only option so to speak

but as the above says if abuse was part of the relationship - the case gets lowered down to manslaughter

[derekgas]

I dont think this should be an issue in todays society, there is enough help available for victims of abuse, and I really cannot understand why anybody would stay in an abusive relationship. Have never been in that situation, but regardless of any situation, the ability to kill would have to be there, so there would have to be a conviction imo.