ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Liverpool incidents , police misconduct charges , UK incidents

Reply
Old 2nd October 2012, 12:42 PM   #361
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
 
Nessie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 12,439
None of the cases discussed here are available as a full unedited court transcript. Yet you find where the cases that suit your argument not to be an issue and those where I have shown a who done it to have issues. You cannot have it both ways.

The police site is reliable as shown by the other reports. Just because it is a police site does not make it unreliable. You should have checked that before you attacked it.

You also look for any opportunity to twist what I have said. So yes justice has to be seen to be done. I only added it has to be done to reinforce that point.

Boville was convicted using an investigatory technique called MAGICOP. He had the motive, ability, guilty intent, identification, conduct after the crime, opportunity and preparation.

His motive was to because the victim was a hated man. He was physically able to kill him by striking him on the head with a fire extinguisher. It was a deliberate act and no way was it an accident. Although he was not witnessed committing the crime he was identified as the only person in the whole enquiry who matched all of MAGICOP, after the crime he tried to get people to lie and give him an alibi. He had the opportunity as he was about the area at the time of the crime and preparation came with taking a key from inside a door where it had always been kept, unlocking the door form the outside, locking it again on leaving and then throwing it away.
__________________
Audiophile/biker/sceptic
Nessie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2012, 11:31 PM   #362
Antony
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: London, England
Posts: 1,715
Originally Posted by Nessie View Post
None of the cases discussed here are available as a full unedited court transcript. Yet you find where the cases that suit your argument not to be an issue and those where I have shown a who done it to have issues. You cannot have it both ways.

The police site is reliable as shown by the other reports. Just because it is a police site does not make it unreliable. You should have checked that before you attacked it.

You also look for any opportunity to twist what I have said. So yes justice has to be seen to be done. I only added it has to be done to reinforce that point.

Boville was convicted using an investigatory technique called MAGICOP. He had the motive, ability, guilty intent, identification, conduct after the crime, opportunity and preparation.

His motive was to because the victim was a hated man. He was physically able to kill him by striking him on the head with a fire extinguisher. It was a deliberate act and no way was it an accident. Although he was not witnessed committing the crime he was identified as the only person in the whole enquiry who matched all of MAGICOP, after the crime he tried to get people to lie and give him an alibi. He had the opportunity as he was about the area at the time of the crime and preparation came with taking a key from inside a door where it had always been kept, unlocking the door form the outside, locking it again on leaving and then throwing it away.
Well, I'll give you a "D" for that, but still no A*-C. (Up to now it's been "U".) What took you so long to come up with something like half-substance?

You describe MAGICOP as an "investigatory technique". So at least this case doesn't fall into the category of the worst of the injustices we've been talking about, where the police plucked the name of their suspect(s) out of thin air, and manufactured a case against them. So the investigation was valid.

The weakest part of your argument is that Bovill was "the only person in the whole enquiry" who ticked all the boxes. What's to say that the real culprit was never investigated? The conviction still looks a lot more like "balance of probabilities" than "beyond reasonable doubt".
Antony is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th October 2012, 01:44 AM   #363
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 44,292
That one gives me the absolute heebie-jeebies.

Quote:
He had the motive, ability, guilty intent, identification, conduct after the crime, opportunity and preparation.

Well, OK, but what about the actual evidence?

This MAGICOP sounds perilously like a sanctioned method of fitting people up. It might be excellent as a tool to identify a likely suspect, but calling that the evidence in default of actually finding any is seriously scary.

It may be that Nessie's account is partial and misleading, and that some genuine evidence was uncovered, but as it stands I'm far from convinced. As Antony says, guilty on the balance of probabilities is not supposed to be enough.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th October 2012, 03:01 AM   #364
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 21,349
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
That one gives me the absolute heebie-jeebies.




Well, OK, but what about the actual evidence?

This MAGICOP sounds perilously like a sanctioned method of fitting people up. It might be excellent as a tool to identify a likely suspect, but calling that the evidence in default of actually finding any is seriously scary.

It may be that Nessie's account is partial and misleading, and that some genuine evidence was uncovered, but as it stands I'm far from convinced. As Antony says, guilty on the balance of probabilities is not supposed to be enough.

Rolfe.
MAGICOP (Motive, Ability, Guilty intent, Identification, Conduct after crime, Opportunity and Preparation) is used specifically where there is an absence of direct evidence, gathering circumstantial elements and creating a case by weaving them together.
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th October 2012, 03:11 AM   #365
anglolawyer
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Guilford
Posts: 13,037
Originally Posted by catsmate1 View Post
MAGICOP (Motive, Ability, Guilty intent, Identification, Conduct after crime, Opportunity and Preparation) is used specifically where there is an absence of direct evidence, gathering circumstantial elements and creating a case by weaving them together.
Take the case of David Gillroy (a Scottish case)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...-fife-17754517

He was convicted of murdering his ex-lover despite the absence not only of forensic evidence but also her body. The facts were that she tried to break off an affair with this married man and he tried to keep her. She was seen on CCTV arriving at her place of work one morning but never actually made it to her desk. The prosecution theory was that Gillroy assaulted her in the basement of the office building where she worked and disposed of her body somewhere in the Scottish highlands. The circumstantial evidence against him included:

1 having texted her 400 times in the previous month he suddenly stopped doing so the day she disappeared
2 the same day, he bought a whole load of air freshener
3 he had cuts on his hands and face which he tried to mask with make up
4 the next day, he made a journey to a particular location but the journey took two hours longer to get there and even longer to get back than it should.

What do we make of that?
anglolawyer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th October 2012, 03:23 AM   #366
Professor Yaffle
Butterbeans and Breadcrumbs
 
Professor Yaffle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Emily's shop
Posts: 17,602
Originally Posted by anglolawyer View Post
Take the case of David Gillroy (a Scottish case)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...-fife-17754517

He was convicted of murdering his ex-lover despite the absence not only of forensic evidence but also her body. The facts were that she tried to break off an affair with this married man and he tried to keep her. She was seen on CCTV arriving at her place of work one morning but never actually made it to her desk. The prosecution theory was that Gillroy assaulted her in the basement of the office building where she worked and disposed of her body somewhere in the Scottish highlands. The circumstantial evidence against him included:

1 having texted her 400 times in the previous month he suddenly stopped doing so the day she disappeared
2 the same day, he bought a whole load of air freshener
3 he had cuts on his hands and face which he tried to mask with make up
4 the next day, he made a journey to a particular location but the journey took two hours longer to get there and even longer to get back than it should.

What do we make of that?
He is currently appealing the verdict, isn't he?
Professor Yaffle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th October 2012, 03:30 AM   #367
anglolawyer
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Guilford
Posts: 13,037
Originally Posted by Professor Yaffle View Post
He is currently appealing the verdict, isn't he?
I didn't know that. It would be interesting to know on what grounds.
anglolawyer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th October 2012, 03:40 AM   #368
Professor Yaffle
Butterbeans and Breadcrumbs
 
Professor Yaffle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Emily's shop
Posts: 17,602
Originally Posted by anglolawyer View Post
I didn't know that. It would be interesting to know on what grounds.
This is the only source I can find since the appeal was allowed and its very short on detail.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...ail-fight.html

ETA - from when the appeal was lodged:

Quote:
A source close to the case said the appeal would be fought on points of law that arose during the trial which Lord Bracadale presided over, but also on a separate earlier hearing during which legal instructions were issued by the judge.
....
"The grounds are based on points of law that arose during the trial and will also include a hearing before the trial where the judge made certain rulings."
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/h...ppeal.18324233

Last edited by Professor Yaffle; 4th October 2012 at 03:59 AM.
Professor Yaffle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th October 2012, 04:08 AM   #369
anglolawyer
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Guilford
Posts: 13,037
Originally Posted by Professor Yaffle View Post
This is the only source I can find since the appeal was allowed and its very short on detail.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...ail-fight.html

ETA - from when the appeal was lodged:

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/h...ppeal.18324233
Thanks for those links. Just about all criminal appeals in British jurisdictions are on points of law so this does not tell us much, unfortunately. It's not at all clear to me why the grounds of appeal should not be public knowledge, along with the reasons for accepting or rejecting particular grounds. Usually, they revolve around the judge's directions to the jury or the admission of evidence the defence tried to have excluded.

It's interesting that he has changed his lawyer.
anglolawyer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th October 2012, 04:25 AM   #370
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 21,349
Originally Posted by anglolawyer View Post
Take the case of David Gillroy (a Scottish case)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...-fife-17754517

He was convicted of murdering his ex-lover despite the absence not only of forensic evidence but also her body. The facts were that she tried to break off an affair with this married man and he tried to keep her. She was seen on CCTV arriving at her place of work one morning but never actually made it to her desk. The prosecution theory was that Gillroy assaulted her in the basement of the office building where she worked and disposed of her body somewhere in the Scottish highlands. The circumstantial evidence against him included:

1 having texted her 400 times in the previous month he suddenly stopped doing so the day she disappeared
2 the same day, he bought a whole load of air freshener
3 he had cuts on his hands and face which he tried to mask with make up
4 the next day, he made a journey to a particular location but the journey took two hours longer to get there and even longer to get back than it should.

What do we make of that?
Odd, curious even. But not really that suspicious and certainly not sufficient in itself to get me to convict him, especially if he could:
1. give a plausible reason for the cessation of text messages on that day, did he know immediately about the disappearance?
2. give a plausible explanation for the injuries
3. explain the additional time.
But even without this I see to justification for conviction on this evidence alone.

OK, there's also the reaction of the cadaver dog, but that (especially in the context of the car park area) seems very flimsy.
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th October 2012, 04:39 AM   #371
anglolawyer
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Guilford
Posts: 13,037
Originally Posted by catsmate1 View Post
Odd, curious even. But not really that suspicious and certainly not sufficient in itself to get me to convict him, especially if he could:
1. give a plausible reason for the cessation of text messages on that day, did he know immediately about the disappearance?
2. give a plausible explanation for the injuries
3. explain the additional time.
But even without this I see to justification for conviction on this evidence alone.

OK, there's also the reaction of the cadaver dog, but that (especially in the context of the car park area) seems very flimsy.
He didn't give evidence - so no explanations I'm afraid.
anglolawyer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th October 2012, 06:05 AM   #372
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 44,292
This derail was actually why I started the Presumption of Innocence thread, but it doesn't seem to have done much good!

I'm deeply uncomfortable with that conviction. And I think he's stuck with it unless he can find some actual exculpatory evidence, because how do you appeal a conviction when a court says guilty on what is blatantly insufficient evidence? He could go the "sufficiency of evidence" route, but it's a difficult one.

I only get seriously aerated about cases where I'm damn sure the accused is factually innocent. Sally Clark, Sion Jenkins, Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, Barry George, you've heard the list before. I'm not "damn sure" Gilroy is innocent.

I am fairly convinced that evidence doesn't add up to "beyond reasonable doubt" though.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th October 2012, 06:13 AM   #373
anglolawyer
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Guilford
Posts: 13,037
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
This derail was actually why I started the Presumption of Innocence thread, but it doesn't seem to have done much good!

I'm deeply uncomfortable with that conviction. And I think he's stuck with it unless he can find some actual exculpatory evidence, because how do you appeal a conviction when a court says guilty on what is blatantly insufficient evidence? He could go the "sufficiency of evidence" route, but it's a difficult one.

I only get seriously aerated about cases where I'm damn sure the accused is factually innocent. Sally Clark, Sion Jenkins, Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, Barry George, you've heard the list before. I'm not "damn sure" Gilroy is innocent.

I am fairly convinced that evidence doesn't add up to "beyond reasonable doubt" though.

Rolfe.
That's funny because I would convict, provided I was satisfied she was actually dead (no body remember) but that was probably easily enough done. Why would you retain a reasonable doubt? I am curious.

Sorry about the derail btw. I did not know about the presumption of innocence thread and I thought this one had been running on different tracks for most of its existence.
anglolawyer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th October 2012, 06:19 AM   #374
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 44,292
I think he probably did it, on the balance of probabilities. It may be if I'd been in court and heard all the evidence I'd agree the "beyond reasonable doubt" standard had been met, but I haven't been convinced by what I've read.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th October 2012, 06:45 AM   #375
anglolawyer
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Guilford
Posts: 13,037
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
I think he probably did it, on the balance of probabilities. It may be if I'd been in court and heard all the evidence I'd agree the "beyond reasonable doubt" standard had been met, but I haven't been convinced by what I've read.

Rolfe.
I think we are allowed a little literary license here. I don't think any opinion I hold about any case discussed on these forums is anything more than provisional. There is no substitute for seeing and hearing all the evidence in all of them. And I treat everyone else's opinions the same way, whether they do or not.

I asked why you retained a reasonable doubt to see of what the doubt would consist. Those aren't just words. It's 'reasonable' doubt, which implies one or more reasons which can be articulated. If we were in the jury room you would be on the spot. Like in 12 Angry Men, when Henry Fonda, in a minority of one, is unable at first to articulate his doubts but just wants to discuss the case a bit before they all troop back into court and condemn the kid, but as the store moves on his doubts begin to acquire some foundation.
anglolawyer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th October 2012, 07:27 AM   #376
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 44,292
I retain doubt in that case which may not qualify as reasonable. The body was never found. Nobody knows where he went that day in the car. So far as I know, he wasn't placed in the basement the day she disappeared. Was there forensic evidence that she was assaulted in the basement?

My doubt may be due to insufficient familiarity with the case. I'm at the stage of, "wait a minute, how did that turn into a conviction beyond reasonable doubt?", rather than shouting about its being a howling scandal. Someone very familiar with the entire case might find me quite easy to convince.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th October 2012, 07:43 AM   #377
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
 
Nessie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 12,439
Here is another use of MAGICOP in the Arlene Fraser murder enquiry

http://freescotland.net/2012/05/31/a...-wifes-murder/

Nat Fraser is now serving 17 years after a re trial.

Re the Bovill case. No I cannot remember every detail, I got more detail by asking someone else what they could remember about the case.
__________________
Audiophile/biker/sceptic
Nessie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th October 2012, 07:45 AM   #378
Professor Yaffle
Butterbeans and Breadcrumbs
 
Professor Yaffle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Emily's shop
Posts: 17,602
CCTV seems to have been the main evidence in this case:

Quote:
However, CCTV cameras on properties outside the building show him going in and out of the basement garage.

The man who quickly became a suspect had arrived at work by bus but later made excuses to go home and collect his car.

Later he was caught by CCTV having just bought four air fresheners.

[snip]

Before Gilroy went home he went to his computer and arranged an appointment which would require him to drive about 130 miles to Lochgilphead in rural Argyll the next day.

The killer then went home and acted naturally.

CCTV images even caught him attending a school concert and a restaurant that evening.

Police reconstructed Gilroy's trip to Argyll on 5 May through CCTV at various places along the route, such as when he stopped for petrol.

Officers had to trawl for CCTV footage from hundreds of cameras - not just on the main route to Lochgilphead but surrounding roads as well.

It was a route Gilroy took regularly but on this occasion he went much further north than the direct route and police were suspicious.

Gilroy's mobile phone was later seized by police, along with his car.

Experts found that the phone had been switched off between Stirling and Inveraray and the same on the way back.

Police suspected Gilroy had deliberately switched his phone off to conceal his movements while he did a "reccy" for a site to dispose of Suzanne's body. He repeated this on his way back when he actually buried the body.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...-fife-17727255

Last edited by Professor Yaffle; 4th October 2012 at 07:46 AM.
Professor Yaffle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th October 2012, 07:51 AM   #379
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 44,292
Thanks for that, Prof. There's obviously more evidence than I was aware of. I hadn't really been following the case, and just got a feeling about there not being much evidence from the incomplete parts I'd read.

I'm still very dubious about the Nat Fraser case. However, I sort of gave up after having read my way half into the case. There's only so much time out there.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th October 2012, 05:59 AM   #380
anglolawyer
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Guilford
Posts: 13,037
So, news of possible criminal charges hits the press today. As expected, we are looking at manslaughter, conspiracy to pervert the course of justice and abuse of public office.

Of considerable interest to me is the closing paragraph of a piece in The Times by Tony Evans (a Liverpool-based journo who has followed the case closely). He says:

Quote:
Beyond the remit of the IPCC many questions remain. The FA and Sheffield Wednesday have never explained how a stadium without a safety certificate was allowed to hold an FA cup semi-final. Tellingly, Wednesday's insurers refused to make their records available to the HIP.
anglolawyer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th October 2012, 02:25 PM   #381
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
 
Nessie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 12,439
Yes to get back on track the news of a full enquiry and all the police involved are to be investigated is good news.
__________________
Audiophile/biker/sceptic
Nessie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th October 2012, 02:37 PM   #382
Alt+F4
diabolical globalist
 
Alt+F4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,997
Originally Posted by anglolawyer View Post
So, news of possible criminal charges hits the press today. As expected, we are looking at manslaughter, conspiracy to pervert the course of justice and abuse of public office.
I totally get the conspiracy and abuse charges, but manslaughter? My understanding is that manslaughter is the actual killing another human, though to a lesser culpability than murder.
__________________
"My folks touched a lot of kids." - Jerry Sandusky
Alt+F4 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th October 2012, 02:56 PM   #383
Matthew Best
Philosopher
 
Matthew Best's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Leicester Square, London
Posts: 7,156
Wikipedia says:

Involuntary manslaughter arises where the accused did not intend to cause death or serious injury but caused the death of another through recklessness or criminal negligence. For these purposes, recklessness is defined as a blatant disregard for the dangers of a particular situation.

(Took me 20 seconds to dig this up.)
Matthew Best is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th October 2012, 03:09 PM   #384
Alt+F4
diabolical globalist
 
Alt+F4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,997
Originally Posted by Matthew Best View Post
Wikipedia says:

Involuntary manslaughter arises where the accused did not intend to cause death or serious injury but caused the death of another through recklessness or criminal negligence. For these purposes, recklessness is defined as a blatant disregard for the dangers of a particular situation.

(Took me 20 seconds to dig this up.)
Wow, you have no idea what the difference is between involuntary manslaughter and manslaughter. Keep relying on 20 second searches to Wikipedia for your "knowledge". None of those responsible for the Hillsborough disaster is being accused of "involuntary" manslaughter.

Whenever anyone starts a post with, "Wikipedia says" you know they are clueless.
__________________
"My folks touched a lot of kids." - Jerry Sandusky
Alt+F4 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th October 2012, 03:59 PM   #385
Matthew Best
Philosopher
 
Matthew Best's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Leicester Square, London
Posts: 7,156
"Involuntary manslaughter" is a subset of "manslaughter".
Matthew Best is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th October 2012, 04:02 PM   #386
Professor Yaffle
Butterbeans and Breadcrumbs
 
Professor Yaffle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Emily's shop
Posts: 17,602
Originally Posted by Alt+F4 View Post
Wow, you have no idea what the difference is between involuntary manslaughter and manslaughter. Keep relying on 20 second searches to Wikipedia for your "knowledge". None of those responsible for the Hillsborough disaster is being accused of "involuntary" manslaughter.

Whenever anyone starts a post with, "Wikipedia says" you know they are clueless.

Funnily enough..... involuntary manslaughter is a category of manslaughter...


The CPS a good enough source for you?

http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/h_to_k/h..._manslaughter/

Lookee there under manslaughter...involuntary manslaughter...gross negligence manslaughter

Last edited by Professor Yaffle; 13th October 2012 at 04:11 PM.
Professor Yaffle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th October 2012, 04:10 PM   #387
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
 
Nessie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 12,439
If anything it is those who let the game go ahead at the ground knowing there was no safety certificate will be amongst the most likly to have manslaughter liabled against them.
__________________
Audiophile/biker/sceptic
Nessie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th October 2012, 12:54 AM   #388
Alt+F4
diabolical globalist
 
Alt+F4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,997
Funny how no one can link to a media report defining the "involuntary" manslaughter accusation against those involved.
__________________
"My folks touched a lot of kids." - Jerry Sandusky
Alt+F4 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th October 2012, 01:49 AM   #389
anglolawyer
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Guilford
Posts: 13,037
Originally Posted by Alt+F4 View Post
Funny how no one can link to a media report defining the "involuntary" manslaughter accusation against those involved.
Strange post. One does not normally find legal definitions in media reports. Generally, the press just uses 'manslaughter' without bothering with the distinction. The nature of 'involuntary' manslaughter has been correctly described up thread so what's your problem?
anglolawyer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th October 2012, 12:21 PM   #390
Antony
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: London, England
Posts: 1,715
Originally Posted by anglolawyer View Post
Strange post. One does not normally find legal definitions in media reports. Generally, the press just uses 'manslaughter' without bothering with the distinction. The nature of 'involuntary' manslaughter has been correctly described up thread so what's your problem?
I had the impression that in the UK we say "manslaughter" and in the US they say "involuntary manslaughter", to mean the same thing. Is that correct?
Antony is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th October 2012, 12:31 PM   #391
Professor Yaffle
Butterbeans and Breadcrumbs
 
Professor Yaffle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Emily's shop
Posts: 17,602
Originally Posted by Antony View Post
I had the impression that in the UK we say "manslaughter" and in the US they say "involuntary manslaughter", to mean the same thing. Is that correct?
I dunno about the US, but in the UK manslaughter covers both voluntary manslaughter (such as diminished responsibility) and involuntary manslaughter.
Professor Yaffle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th October 2012, 02:20 PM   #392
Matthew Best
Philosopher
 
Matthew Best's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Leicester Square, London
Posts: 7,156
Try telling that to Alt-F4. She'll probably call you "clueless".
Matthew Best is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th October 2012, 02:35 PM   #393
zooterkin
Nitpicking dilettante
Deputy Admin
 
zooterkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Berkshire, mostly
Posts: 44,014
Originally Posted by Alt+F4 View Post
Funny how no one can link to a media report defining the "involuntary" manslaughter accusation against those involved.
Well, unless it's being suggested that the disaster was caused deliberately, and I haven't seen that, then it has to be involuntary manslaughter, as I understand it.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.Bertrand Russell
Zooterkin is correct Darat
Nerd! Hokulele
Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232
Ezekiel 23:20
zooterkin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th October 2012, 10:12 PM   #394
anglolawyer
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Guilford
Posts: 13,037
Originally Posted by Antony View Post
I had the impression that in the UK we say "manslaughter" and in the US they say "involuntary manslaughter", to mean the same thing. Is that correct?
No. In England and Wales we have voluntary and involuntary manslaughter. Someone posted a link to a concise explanation of the two just upthread.
anglolawyer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th October 2012, 03:15 AM   #395
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 21,349
Originally Posted by Nessie View Post
If anything it is those who let the game go ahead at the ground knowing there was no safety certificate will be amongst the most likly to have manslaughter liabled against them.
Actually the ground did have a safety certificate, however this wasn't revised or modified after the significant structural changes of 1981 and 1985. Taylor was critical of Sheffield City Council over this failing.

Originally Posted by Antony View Post
I had the impression that in the UK we say "manslaughter" and in the US they say "involuntary manslaughter", to mean the same thing. Is that correct?
I think it's a hold over from the relatively recent formal differentiation of the forms of manslaughter.
Originally Posted by Alt+F4 View Post
Funny how no one can link to a media report defining the "involuntary" manslaughter accusation against those involved.
Is the BBC good enough for you? Allow me to quote their quote:
Quote:
And the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) Keir Starmer will review evidence relating to how the 96 fans died, which could lead to charges of manslaughter through gross negligence.
You'll find this on several of their pages covering the story.

Accept you're wrong and stop digging.


ETA: there's also some discussion of possible charges of corporate manslaughter against SYP and SCC
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.

Last edited by catsmate; 16th October 2012 at 03:21 AM. Reason: Fixed formatting and added ETA section
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th October 2012, 06:27 AM   #396
Matthew Best
Philosopher
 
Matthew Best's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Leicester Square, London
Posts: 7,156
Originally Posted by catsmate1 View Post
Accept you're wrong and stop digging.
Some people can't bring themselves to do this. Or, rather, they can stop digging, but they won't acknowledge that they were wrong in the first place.
Matthew Best is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2012, 04:53 AM   #397
anglolawyer
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Guilford
Posts: 13,037
So yesterday the Chief Constable of SYP appeared before a select committee of the H of C to explain why his force had done nothing over a period of years about pedophile rings grooming 100s of under age girls for sex. He said they had not given the problem sufficiently high priority. Since there had been zero prosecutions that was putting it mildly.

I did say upthread that the police exist for the sole purpose of repressing the working class and no one took me seriously (admittedly, I was half joking - but only half). The necessity of tackling crime is an irritating incident of their main role, as the South Yorkshire Police so clearly demonstrate. Why didn't they act? Because these girls were the worthless product of the underclass, just like the Liverpool fans (as seen by the cops and their partners in the media).

What was the toothless, spineless police authority doing all this time about this shameful neglect? Nothing I bet. These guys need shaking up but it will never happen. Once everything has blown over it will be business as usual. Just wait.
anglolawyer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2012, 08:27 AM   #398
anglolawyer
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Guilford
Posts: 13,037
OMG if only this had been SYP

Originally Posted by BBC
Sword hunt police stun blind man
Lancashire Police apologise after an officer uses a Taser on a blind man whose white stick is mistaken for a sword.
Beat that!
anglolawyer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2012, 10:40 AM   #399
Antony
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: London, England
Posts: 1,715
Originally Posted by anglolawyer View Post
No. In England and Wales we have voluntary and involuntary manslaughter. Someone posted a link to a concise explanation of the two just upthread.
OK, I didn't read that until just now. It seems the distinction came in only 2 years ago in the UK, so I wasn't aware of it.
Antony is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2012, 10:58 AM   #400
Antony
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: London, England
Posts: 1,715
The finest police in the world

It's official. On Monday 15th October, the Home Secretary again repeated the mantra "I believe we do have the best police officers in the world ..." in the context of the hoo-hah over the confrontation between Andrew Mitchell and a policeman.

This in the aftermath of the Hillsborough and Ian Tomlinson scandals.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode...nt_15_10_2012/
Antony is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:13 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.