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

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Trials and Errors
 


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 Grace Millane , murder cases , New Zealand cases

Reply
Old 22nd November 2019, 01:08 PM   #241
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
 
Nessie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 13,098
I wonder if the lack of injury was due to her being unconscious and not struggling? Maybe only light pressure is enough to block the airway?
__________________
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 22nd November 2019, 01:14 PM   #242
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 17,002
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
Supporting my earlier comment of 10 minutes strangulation.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crim...-a4293601.html


It appears that some here find this whole concept rather difficult to figure out and understand.

With the apparent result that they still believe it's entirely reasonable to suppose that the defendant convict in this case might simply have slightly innocently misjudged the whole sexual-choking thing, with the unintended consequence being the wholly-accidental death of Millane.........
LondonJohn 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 22nd November 2019, 01:29 PM   #243
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 17,002
Originally Posted by Nessie View Post
I wonder if the lack of injury was due to her being unconscious and not struggling? Maybe only light pressure is enough to block the airway?


Absolutely. I wrote something to this effect earlier. The point is that if Millane did indeed consent to being choked, with the objective being heightened sexual arousal by means of erotic asphyxiation, then obviously she would have expected at the very least to have been choked to a point just shy of unconsciousness - because this is the very point at which the heightened sexual arousal takes place. And I'd further suggest that she'd have been entirely prepared for a scenario in which she was accidentally choked further than that point, and into actual unconsciousness. But I'd hope everyone here would see it as a given that Millane would have expected the person doing the choking to release his grip as soon as he observed that she'd become unconscious, such that she'd quickly regain consciousness.

As such, it stands to reason that Millane would almost certainly not have been resisting and struggling even up to the point of unconsciousness. So: no defensive or struggle-based injuries. But on the matter of bruising only having been inflicted on one side of Millane's neck, the reason for this seems absurdly simple and obvious to me: a strong male with reasonably large hands can very easily choke a more slight woman with just one hand. There's absolutely no reason to assume that necessarily this man must have had both hands around Millane's neck.

Remember also (and perhaps some here don't realise) that if the mechanism of death in this case was strangulation, this has little or nothing to do with constriction of the windpipe and interruption to breathing. Rather, it's to do with restricting or cutting off the flow of blood to/from the brain. And again, for a reasonably well-built man with good-sized hands, it's actually rather easy to use just one hand to squeeze around one side of the neck, with the effect of compressing one or more carotid arteries and thereby interrupting blood flow to the brain. I strongly suspect that this is exactly what happened in this case.
LondonJohn 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 22nd November 2019, 02:47 PM   #244
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 9,477
This looks like accidental murder if we are to agree with the verdict.
When first applying pressure to the neck we have no reason to believe there was murderous intent. Did murderous intent develop as the exercise continued?
New Zealanders react as expected, with one kiwiblogger calling for LWOP.

"It would take the majority of sensible thinkers about ten seconds to decide the only sentence applicable is life without parole."
Samson 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 22nd November 2019, 03:08 PM   #245
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 9,477
Originally Posted by Matthew Best View Post
The Evening Standard have named him on their front page today, so I guess they've decided they don't really care about New Zealand's suppression orders. The BBC have left him anonymous, for now.
New Zealand remains outraged at the breach of their suppression order.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/a...ectid=12287727

Despite repeated warnings after the man's first appearance in December last year, dozens of publications repeatedly breached the suppression order.

In July, Google suspended its trending emails in New Zealand and apologised to Justice Minister Andrew Little after a mass email went to 10,000 subscribers naming the killer.

Following that, Little began work with the UK, Australia and Canada to see what more could be done to ensure suppression orders were obeyed.

At that time, there were fears in the legal community the continuous publication of the 27-year-old's name and details would compromise the trial.


Well let us see now, if a New Zealand woman met her death in London in a similar fashion would we all be quite happy to have no information after 12 months?

Last edited by Samson; 22nd November 2019 at 03:16 PM.
Samson 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 22nd November 2019, 03:45 PM   #246
Agatha
Winking at the Moon
Deputy Admin
 
Agatha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 14,159
Originally Posted by Samson View Post

[snip] At that time, there were fears in the legal community the continuous publication of the 27-year-old's name and details would compromise the trial.
Isn't the trial over now that the 27 year old man (who obviously I won't name) has been convicted?
__________________
Why can't you be more like Agatha? - Loss Leader
Agatha 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 22nd November 2019, 04:06 PM   #247
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 47,181
Someone suggested earlier in the thread that he had also been charged with a separate crime of rape against someone else and the name suppression was to prevent prejudice of that trial. If that's the case I suspect that's past praying for now. The rape trial is probably hopelessly compromised.
__________________
"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 22nd November 2019, 04:40 PM   #248
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 47,147
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
This looks like accidental murder if we are to agree with the verdict.
When first applying pressure to the neck we have no reason to believe there was murderous intent. Did murderous intent develop as the exercise continued?
New Zealanders react as expected, with one kiwiblogger calling for LWOP.

"It would take the majority of sensible thinkers about ten seconds to decide the only sentence applicable is life without parole."
This does not follow at all. This was no accident.
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking 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 22nd November 2019, 04:44 PM   #249
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 47,147
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
New Zealand remains outraged at the breach of their suppression order.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/a...ectid=12287727

Despite repeated warnings after the man's first appearance in December last year, dozens of publications repeatedly breached the suppression order.

In July, Google suspended its trending emails in New Zealand and apologised to Justice Minister Andrew Little after a mass email went to 10,000 subscribers naming the killer.

Following that, Little began work with the UK, Australia and Canada to see what more could be done to ensure suppression orders were obeyed.

At that time, there were fears in the legal community the continuous publication of the 27-year-old's name and details would compromise the trial.


Well let us see now, if a New Zealand woman met her death in London in a similar fashion would we all be quite happy to have no information after 12 months?
Big deal. No single country can control the internet. Cardinal Pell’s name was all over the internet despite suppressing orders. He still got a fair trial.
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking 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 22nd November 2019, 04:50 PM   #250
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 50,511
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
Big deal. No single country can control the internet. Cardinal Pell’s name was all over the internet despite suppressing orders. He still got a fair trial.
Or did he? If suppressing orders are supposed to ensure a fair trial, but modern technology makes a mockery of suppressing orders, how can you argue that someone still got a fair trial, when the suppressing order was nullified by modern technology?
theprestige 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 22nd November 2019, 05:07 PM   #251
Azrael 5
Philosopher
 
Azrael 5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 6,020
Daily Mail have followed the pack https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...er_dailymailUK
__________________
"I achieve these results through a mixture of magic,misdirection,suggestion and showmanship"-Derren Brown
Azrael 5 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 22nd November 2019, 05:08 PM   #252
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 47,147
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Or did he? If suppressing orders are supposed to ensure a fair trial, but modern technology makes a mockery of suppressing orders, how can you argue that someone still got a fair trial, when the suppressing order was nullified by modern technology?
Because the trial judge and the appeals court decided he got a fair trial.

Is your argument that nobody can get a fair trial if their case is discussed on the internet against the wishes of a jurisdiction? This is just a stupid argument.
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking 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 22nd November 2019, 05:13 PM   #253
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 9,477
Originally Posted by Azrael 5 View Post
Daily Mail have followed the pack https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...er_dailymailUK
Can't read here, any chance you could post the relevant text?
Samson 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 22nd November 2019, 05:16 PM   #254
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 9,477
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
Someone suggested earlier in the thread that he had also been charged with a separate crime of rape against someone else and the name suppression was to prevent prejudice of that trial. If that's the case I suspect that's past praying for now. The rape trial is probably hopelessly compromised.
It is probable the rape allegation was made after the arrest for murder, my logic path tells me.
Samson 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 22nd November 2019, 05:17 PM   #255
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 47,181
This is the header summary.

Quote:
Revealed: How 'creepy' failed salesman who murdered British backpacker Grace Millane lived a fantasy life, claiming he had cancer, his parents were dead and his cousin was an All Blacks star - all to lure young women into violent sex
  • J**** K****** has been found guilty of murdering Brit backpacker Grace Millane, 22, in New Zealand last December
  • The 27-year-old remained emotionless in the dock as the verdict was read out, after five hours of deliberating
  • Ms Millane, from Wickford, Essex, had been on a backpacking holiday when she went on a Tinder date with the failed salesman to SkyCasino
  • They went back to the hotel where he was staying on December 1 - on the eve of her 22nd birthday - where he claimed he throttled her during sex
  • K****** then took photos of her dead body, put her in a suitcase, hired a car and dumped her in bushland
  • The killer has been described by former friends as a serial fantasist who spun a web of lies to feed his obsession of having violent sex with young women
__________________
"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 22nd November 2019, 05:19 PM   #256
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 47,181
If an accused on trial for rape has already been identified as having murdered another sexual partner it could well be that no fair trial could happen.
__________________
"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 22nd November 2019, 07:31 PM   #257
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 9,477
Several possibilities, I think this covers them.

* A complaint was made and he was charged with rape before Dec 1
* A complaint was made and no charges had been laid before Dec 1 but were laid after he was arrested and charged with murder.
* A complaint was made and charges laid after he was arrested and charged with murder.

I think the third is by far most likely.

The trial will be very important for his attempts later at parole and almost all his future travails, and it is hard to see how such a trial will work in the NZ context. I guess imagine this mess in Scotland or Ireland for comparison.

Last edited by Samson; 22nd November 2019 at 07:41 PM.
Samson 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 22nd November 2019, 08:27 PM   #258
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 17,002
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
Several possibilities, I think this covers them.

* A complaint was made and he was charged with rape before Dec 1
* A complaint was made and no charges had been laid before Dec 1 but were laid after he was arrested and charged with murder.
* A complaint was made and charges laid after he was arrested and charged with murder.

I think the third is by far most likely.

The trial will be very important for his attempts later at parole and almost all his future travails, and it is hard to see how such a trial will work in the NZ context. I guess imagine this mess in Scotland or Ireland for comparison.


Firstly, it doesn't strike me as a mess at all. It's far from uncommon in high-profile cases for other alleged victims to come forward on account of the publicity related to the first trial (sometimes these latter accusations are untrue, sometimes they're true....), and for the person on trial subsequently to go on trial a second (and even third or fourth) time on charges arising from these later accusations.

In particular, we've seen lots of this around the whole "metoo" movement and around investigations/trials related to historic sex offence accusations. And very often, the defendants concerned are well-known public figures. While it's clearly not wholly desirable for, e.g., Rolf Harris to have gone on trial again on additional historic sex offence charges, at a point when I'd venture to say that every single adult in the UK knew very well that he'd been convicted on several similar charges in his first trial.... this is the point when the judge's instructions to the second (and third, etc) jury are absolutely critical: the judge must compel the jury, in the most severe terms, to assess the defendant's guilt or non-guilt purely upon evidence and argument put to them in this particular trial, and not to let their opinion be coloured by knowledge of the outcome of previous trials (although E&W law increasingly allows - under very strict circumstances - for "similar fact" evidence to be introduced to indicate a pattern of repeat offending).

So I don't see any particular issues around the man who's just been convicted of Millane's murder subsequently standing trial again on fresh criminal charges (provided, as I said, the trial judge directs the jury explicitly and firmly).


And also, I'm not sure what you mean by "The trial will be very important for his attempts later at parole". This man is 100% guaranteed to receive a life sentence for the Millane murder - the only issues to resolve are a) whether - and if so, by how much - any psychiatric reports or other issues contribute to an adjustment in the number of years he must spend in prison before even being considered for parole. But that number of years is effectively certain to be well in excess of 10.

So the issue of parole has zero short-term (or even medium-term) relevance here. The only issue in which his near-term release from prison would be relevant is around any appeal he lodges, and if he's subsequently granted leave to appeal. However, I'd say that even if this happens, there's also virtually no chance that the Court of Appeal would grant him parole pending his appeal being heard. Furthermore, I'd say that even if he's granted leave to appeal, and his appeal successfully quashes his conviction in favour of a retrial, there's still a very low chance that he'd be released on bail pending such a retrial.
LondonJohn 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 22nd November 2019, 08:39 PM   #259
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 17,002
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
This looks like accidental murder if we are to agree with the verdict.
When first applying pressure to the neck we have no reason to believe there was murderous intent. Did murderous intent develop as the exercise continued?
New Zealanders react as expected, with one kiwiblogger calling for LWOP.

"It would take the majority of sensible thinkers about ten seconds to decide the only sentence applicable is life without parole."


I fundamentally disagree with your analysis here.

It's effectively immaterial as to whether this man had the intent to seriously injure or kill Millane at the point when he began choking her. For the sake of argument, we can posit that he didn't have any such intent at that point.

But....

....the only important factor to consider is whether or not this man must have had intent to seriously injure or kill Millane at some point before he actually did cause her death.

And the striking evidence which convinces me (and, it would appear, the trial jury) that this man must indeed have had the intent to seriously injure or kill Millane at some point before he caused her death is - as I've argued so, so many times before - as follows: he must by definition have continued to apply a strong choke hold to Millane's neck for a very considerable period of time after she fell into unconsciousness.

Now, this action is (IMO, and apparently in the opinion of the jury also) wholly incompatible with that of a man whose sole innocent intent is to perform an erotic asphyxiation act upon a sexual partner, with the sole aim of heightening her sexual arousal. Once she'd been choked unconscious - a point which cannot fail to be noticed by the one doing the choking, on account of the fact that she'd have become limp and unresponsive with her eyes closed - the "aim of the game" would clearly and obviously have been surpassed.

Someone whose sole intent was to assist in the heighened sexual arousal of his sex partner would have released his grip at that point (or at most, within several seconds thereafter), in order to allow his partner to regain consciousness. But what the man in this case did instead was to carry on choking the limp, lifeless body of Millane for many dozens of seconds further. There can (again IMO, and apparently in the opinion of the jury also) be no other explanation for this than that he must have intended to cause Millane serious injury or death. And that's murder.

Last edited by LondonJohn; 22nd November 2019 at 08:41 PM.
LondonJohn 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 22nd November 2019, 11:04 PM   #260
Matthew Best
Philosopher
 
Matthew Best's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Leicester Square, London
Posts: 8,433
Senior lawyers and women’s organisations have condemned the increasing use of “rough sex gone wrong” as a courtroom defence to the murder of women and called for a change to the law in the UK.

In the wake of the conviction of British backpacker Grace Millane’s killer in New Zealand, researchers have revealed a tenfold rise over the past two decades in the number of times similar claims have been made in UK courts.

According to the campaign group We Can’t Consent to This, in the past decade 30 women and girls have been killed in what was claimed to have been consensual violent sexual activity in the UK.

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2019...ence-uk-courts
Matthew Best is online now   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 22nd November 2019, 11:29 PM   #261
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 9,477
Smile

Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
I fundamentally disagree with your analysis here.

It's effectively immaterial as to whether this man had the intent to seriously injure or kill Millane at the point when he began choking her. For the sake of argument, we can posit that he didn't have any such intent at that point.

But....

....the only important factor to consider is whether or not this man must have had intent to seriously injure or kill Millane at some point before he actually did cause her death.

And the striking evidence which convinces me (and, it would appear, the trial jury) that this man must indeed have had the intent to seriously injure or kill Millane at some point before he caused her death is - as I've argued so, so many times before - as follows: he must by definition have continued to apply a strong choke hold to Millane's neck for a very considerable period of time after she fell into unconsciousness.

Now, this action is (IMO, and apparently in the opinion of the jury also) wholly incompatible with that of a man whose sole innocent intent is to perform an erotic asphyxiation act upon a sexual partner, with the sole aim of heightening her sexual arousal. Once she'd been choked unconscious - a point which cannot fail to be noticed by the one doing the choking, on account of the fact that she'd have become limp and unresponsive with her eyes closed - the "aim of the game" would clearly and obviously have been surpassed.

Someone whose sole intent was to assist in the heighened sexual arousal of his sex partner would have released his grip at that point (or at most, within several seconds thereafter), in order to allow his partner to regain consciousness. But what the man in this case did instead was to carry on choking the limp, lifeless body of Millane for many dozens of seconds further. There can (again IMO, and apparently in the opinion of the jury also) be no other explanation for this than that he must have intended to cause Millane serious injury or death. And that's murder.
Yes but the penultimate date expressed a somewhat perfect experience.
This is confounding evidence by any measure. Let us assume he was sober then but drunk with Ms Millane...
(since I kind of agree with your customary use of repeated ... to keep people reflecting, I am not being a plagiarist )
Samson 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 22nd November 2019, 11:34 PM   #262
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 9,477
Originally Posted by Matthew Best View Post
Senior lawyers and women’s organisations have condemned the increasing use of “rough sex gone wrong” as a courtroom defence to the murder of women and called for a change to the law in the UK.

In the wake of the conviction of British backpacker Grace Millane’s killer in New Zealand, researchers have revealed a tenfold rise over the past two decades in the number of times similar claims have been made in UK courts.

According to the campaign group We Can’t Consent to This, in the past decade 30 women and girls have been killed in what was claimed to have been consensual violent sexual activity in the UK.

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2019...ence-uk-courts
This is a failure of the education methods in Western democracy, it should never take a decade to transform protocols that would surely avail young women of knowledge of this catastrophe in cultural risk taking.
Some serious work should be yesterday, today and tomorrow at the latest.
Samson 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 23rd November 2019, 01:16 AM   #263
Fixit
Thinker
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 242
I expected today some news break from those experienced in 'choking for pleasure.' It hasn't happened. On the face of it the horse has fled the stable with much reporting around the 'time' needed to cause death. That overlooks other facts in this case.
I recall from swimming and free diving the longest time I was able to hold my breath appeared from memory far less than a minute. When that happens when you're underwater you immediately head to the surface. If you were being choked you would go for the hands or to the ligature.
So without any information on the topic of 'choking time' I searched under 'choking time' and other headings before recalling reading an unusual term on a NZ blog today - breath play.

Follow 3 links as to breath play:

The third seems to be evidenced based whilst other 2 appear more to be warnings. They warn in terms of seconds rather than minutes.

Adding to that is other information that in Britain a women is strangled to death every 2 weeks. And that the NZ law regarding murder was amended to expressly use the language around halting breath. Reportedly that amendment puts NZ law along with at least 2 other countries as advanced in recognizing the dangers of choking. Initially when reading it I thought it was amended to clarify cases of assisted euthanasia but now without reading the Parliamentary Bill I'm not sure.

https://www.cosmopolitan.com/sex-lov...ath-play-bdsm/

https://www.chicagoreader.com/chicag...t?oid=33151336

https://www.healthline.com/health/he...xiation#safety

It appears that the fixation with how long pressure needed to be applied overlooked what the minimum time could be before things possibly went wrong. The very key to this case.

Last edited by Fixit; 23rd November 2019 at 01:23 AM.
Fixit 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 23rd November 2019, 01:31 AM   #264
Fixit
Thinker
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 242
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
Someone suggested earlier in the thread that he had also been charged with a separate crime of rape against someone else and the name suppression was to prevent prejudice of that trial. If that's the case I suspect that's past praying for now. The rape trial is probably hopelessly compromised.
Probably not in NZ where in the Millane trial the prosecution were allowed to make the unproven claim about the timing of the photos.
Fixit 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 23rd November 2019, 01:34 AM   #265
Fixit
Thinker
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 242
Originally Posted by Matthew Best View Post
Senior lawyers and women’s organisations have condemned the increasing use of “rough sex gone wrong” as a courtroom defence to the murder of women and called for a change to the law in the UK.

In the wake of the conviction of British backpacker Grace Millane’s killer in New Zealand, researchers have revealed a tenfold rise over the past two decades in the number of times similar claims have been made in UK courts.

According to the campaign group We Can’t Consent to This, in the past decade 30 women and girls have been killed in what was claimed to have been consensual violent sexual activity in the UK.

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2019...ence-uk-courts
That's around thirty defences of what is calculated to be 250 cases of 'choking to death' in Britain over that period.
Fixit 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 23rd November 2019, 01:37 AM   #266
Fixit
Thinker
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 242
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
I fundamentally disagree with your analysis here.

It's effectively immaterial as to whether this man had the intent to seriously injure or kill Millane at the point when he began choking her. For the sake of argument, we can posit that he didn't have any such intent at that point.

But....

....the only important factor to consider is whether or not this man must have had intent to seriously injure or kill Millane at some point before he actually did cause her death.

And the striking evidence which convinces me (and, it would appear, the trial jury) that this man must indeed have had the intent to seriously injure or kill Millane at some point before he caused her death is - as I've argued so, so many times before - as follows: he must by definition have continued to apply a strong choke hold to Millane's neck for a very considerable period of time after she fell into unconsciousness.

Now, this action is (IMO, and apparently in the opinion of the jury also) wholly incompatible with that of a man whose sole innocent intent is to perform an erotic asphyxiation act upon a sexual partner, with the sole aim of heightening her sexual arousal. Once she'd been choked unconscious - a point which cannot fail to be noticed by the one doing the choking, on account of the fact that she'd have become limp and unresponsive with her eyes closed - the "aim of the game" would clearly and obviously have been surpassed.

Someone whose sole intent was to assist in the heighened sexual arousal of his sex partner would have released his grip at that point (or at most, within several seconds thereafter), in order to allow his partner to regain consciousness. But what the man in this case did instead was to carry on choking the limp, lifeless body of Millane for many dozens of seconds further. There can (again IMO, and apparently in the opinion of the jury also) be no other explanation for this than that he must have intended to cause Millane serious injury or death. And that's murder.
'And the striking evidence which convinces me (and, it would appear, the trial jury) that this man must indeed have had the intent to seriously injure or kill Millane at some point before he caused her death is - as I've argued so, so many times before - as follows: he must by definition have continued to apply a strong choke hold to Millane's neck for a very considerable period of time after she fell into unconsciousness.'


'as I've argued so, so many times before - as follows: he must by definition have continued to apply a strong choke hold to Millane's neck for a very considerable period of time after she fell into unconsciousness.'

Yes, 'so many times.' But don't let that stop you.
Fixit 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 23rd November 2019, 01:37 AM   #267
Matthew Best
Philosopher
 
Matthew Best's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Leicester Square, London
Posts: 8,433
Karen Ingala-Smith, the chief executive of the domestic violence charity Nia, said: “Women don’t die from rough sex. Women die because men are violent to them.”
Matthew Best is online now   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 23rd November 2019, 01:39 AM   #268
Fixit
Thinker
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 242
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
It appears that some here find this whole concept rather difficult to figure out and understand.

With the apparent result that they still believe it's entirely reasonable to suppose that the defendant convict in this case might simply have slightly innocently misjudged the whole sexual-choking thing, with the unintended consequence being the wholly-accidental death of Millane.........
'It appears that some here find this whole concept rather difficult to figure out and understand.'

Remarkable insight you have there old chap.
Fixit 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 23rd November 2019, 01:40 AM   #269
cullennz
Embarrasingly illiterate
 
cullennz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NZ
Posts: 19,954
Originally Posted by Matthew Best View Post
Karen Ingala-Smith, the chief executive of the domestic violence charity Nia, said: “Women don’t die from rough sex. Women die because men are violent to them.”
Are you saying it was my fathers fault my mother died of cancer?
__________________
"I mean, you've got the first sort of mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy. I mean, that's a story-book, man," Biden said.

2007 https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna16911044
cullennz is online now   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 23rd November 2019, 01:47 AM   #270
Matthew Best
Philosopher
 
Matthew Best's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Leicester Square, London
Posts: 8,433
Yes, obviously.
Matthew Best is online now   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 23rd November 2019, 01:49 AM   #271
cullennz
Embarrasingly illiterate
 
cullennz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NZ
Posts: 19,954
Originally Posted by Matthew Best View Post
Yes, obviously.
Awesome

I'll let him know

__________________
"I mean, you've got the first sort of mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy. I mean, that's a story-book, man," Biden said.

2007 https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna16911044
cullennz is online now   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 23rd November 2019, 01:51 AM   #272
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 9,477
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
Firstly, it doesn't strike me as a mess at all. It's far from uncommon in high-profile cases for other alleged victims to come forward on account of the publicity related to the first trial (sometimes these latter accusations are untrue, sometimes they're true....), and for the person on trial subsequently to go on trial a second (and even third or fourth) time on charges arising from these later accusations.

In particular, we've seen lots of this around the whole "metoo" movement and around investigations/trials related to historic sex offence accusations. And very often, the defendants concerned are well-known public figures. While it's clearly not wholly desirable for, e.g., Rolf Harris to have gone on trial again on additional historic sex offence charges, at a point when I'd venture to say that every single adult in the UK knew very well that he'd been convicted on several similar charges in his first trial.... this is the point when the judge's instructions to the second (and third, etc) jury are absolutely critical: the judge must compel the jury, in the most severe terms, to assess the defendant's guilt or non-guilt purely upon evidence and argument put to them in this particular trial, and not to let their opinion be coloured by knowledge of the outcome of previous trials (although E&W law increasingly allows - under very strict circumstances - for "similar fact" evidence to be introduced to indicate a pattern of repeat offending).

So I don't see any particular issues around the man who's just been convicted of Millane's murder subsequently standing trial again on fresh criminal charges (provided, as I said, the trial judge directs the jury explicitly and firmly).


And also, I'm not sure what you mean by "The trial will be very important for his attempts later at parole". This man is 100% guaranteed to receive a life sentence for the Millane murder - the only issues to resolve are a) whether - and if so, by how much - any psychiatric reports or other issues contribute to an adjustment in the number of years he must spend in prison before even being considered for parole. But that number of years is effectively certain to be well in excess of 10.

So the issue of parole has zero short-term (or even medium-term) relevance here. The only issue in which his near-term release from prison would be relevant is around any appeal he lodges, and if he's subsequently granted leave to appeal. However, I'd say that even if this happens, there's also virtually no chance that the Court of Appeal would grant him parole pending his appeal being heard. Furthermore, I'd say that even if he's granted leave to appeal, and his appeal successfully quashes his conviction in favour of a retrial, there's still a very low chance that he'd be released on bail pending such a retrial.
Extended post that is worthy of attention, but I am mindful of the immediate reincarnation as villain of Amanda Knox, Mark Lundy et al.
This guy is a serial fabricator for a specific purpose, and I totally refute the notion it is to one day kill for thrill and get away with it.
He is now a described villain, yet game theory affords him leeway for any applied scientist.
Samson 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 23rd November 2019, 02:15 AM   #273
cullennz
Embarrasingly illiterate
 
cullennz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NZ
Posts: 19,954
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
Extended post that is worthy of attention, but I am mindful of the immediate reincarnation as villain of Amanda Knox, Mark Lundy et al.
This guy is a serial fabricator for a specific purpose, and I totally refute the notion it is to one day kill for thrill and get away with it.
He is now a described villain, yet game theory affords him leeway for any applied scientist.
Have no idea what game theory is, but common sense says he still has name suppression due to other charges and "purely rumour" says they might be rape, so she is a bit up in the air at the mo'
__________________
"I mean, you've got the first sort of mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy. I mean, that's a story-book, man," Biden said.

2007 https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna16911044
cullennz is online now   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 23rd November 2019, 02:20 AM   #274
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 9,477
Originally Posted by cullennz View Post
Have no idea what game theory is, but common sense says he still has name suppression due to other charges and "purely rumour" says they might be rape, so she is a bit up in the air at the mo'
Game theory is important. It requires rogue genes to ensure scepticism. Accused is non conformist and dangerous, yet we should accommodate his life in order to feel righteous about our lives.
Samson 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 23rd November 2019, 11:38 AM   #275
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 17,002
Originally Posted by Fixit View Post
Probably not in NZ where in the Millane trial the prosecution were allowed to make the unproven claim about the timing of the photos.


1) You do know, don't you, that the photos were, in fact timed?

2) You do also know, don't you, that the timing of the last few of the photos - which depicted Milane lying with her eyes closed - was shortly after the timing of his internet searches for the area in which he subsequently dumped her body?

Any observations about the above?
LondonJohn 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 23rd November 2019, 11:40 AM   #276
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 17,002
Originally Posted by Fixit View Post
'And the striking evidence which convinces me (and, it would appear, the trial jury) that this man must indeed have had the intent to seriously injure or kill Millane at some point before he caused her death is - as I've argued so, so many times before - as follows: he must by definition have continued to apply a strong choke hold to Millane's neck for a very considerable period of time after she fell into unconsciousness.'


'as I've argued so, so many times before - as follows: he must by definition have continued to apply a strong choke hold to Millane's neck for a very considerable period of time after she fell into unconsciousness.'

Yes, 'so many times.' But don't let that stop you.


I only keep repeating it because certain posters within this thread keep seeming unable to recognise and understand it, and keep attempting arguments which are fundamentally at odds with it.......
LondonJohn 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 23rd November 2019, 11:41 AM   #277
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 17,002
Originally Posted by Fixit View Post
'It appears that some here find this whole concept rather difficult to figure out and understand.'

Remarkable insight you have there old chap.


Not sure what you meant with the condescension..... maybe your efforts would be better served in figuring out the critical areas in this case properly.
LondonJohn 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 23rd November 2019, 11:53 AM   #278
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 17,002
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
Extended post that is worthy of attention, but I am mindful of the immediate reincarnation as villain of Amanda Knox, Mark Lundy et al.
This guy is a serial fabricator for a specific purpose, and I totally refute the notion it is to one day kill for thrill and get away with it.
He is now a described villain, yet game theory affords him leeway for any applied scientist.

I am having difficulty understanding what you mean here.

Quite apart from my difficulty in understanding, I'd make the general observation that people are convicted or acquitted in criminal trials based solely on the evidence introduced into those trials. If the evidence, taken in totality, is only compatible with guilt (which is effectively another way of saying that guilt has been proved BARD), then the person must be convicted. If the evidence, taken in totality, can reasonably be consistent with anything other than guilt, then the person must be acquitted. Simple as that.

And in the case which is the subject of this thread, I argue that the totality of the evidence is solely compatible with a scenario in which the man must have had the intent to do, at the very least, serious injury to Millane; and he caused her death. This therefore passes the test for murder, and he should have been found guilty of murder. And he was. I don't think a miscarriage of justice took place here.
LondonJohn 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 23rd November 2019, 11:55 AM   #279
Agatha
Winking at the Moon
Deputy Admin
 
Agatha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 14,159
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
Someone suggested earlier in the thread that he had also been charged with a separate crime of rape against someone else and the name suppression was to prevent prejudice of that trial. If that's the case I suspect that's past praying for now. The rape trial is probably hopelessly compromised.
Ah, thank you; I must have missed or misunderstood that earlier.

I'm surprised the rape case, if that's what it is, wasn't dealt with first in that case. Even if it meant halting the murder trial.
__________________
Why can't you be more like Agatha? - Loss Leader
Agatha 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 23rd November 2019, 12:02 PM   #280
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 47,181
I really don't know if that's the case, or if it's been confirmed. It may just be speculation. But it's a speculative possibility that makes sense of the name suppression, when nothing else does. There may be logistical reasons why a separate offence couldn't be tried first.
__________________
"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
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Trials and Errors

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 12:21 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2021, 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.