Oscar Pistorius Murder

Oscar Pistorius Murder
The Butler did it With the Candlestick
Introduction
The US criminal law provides for a difference between the two crimes of murder and manslaughter.
The law describes manslaughter as the killing of a person without any malicious intent
(Manslaughter Law, n.d.). As per the US common law, murder was construed to mean killing
intentionally with malice aforethought or just killing unlawfully (Homicide: Murder and
Manslaughter | Nolo.com, n.d.). Manslaughter may be voluntary or involuntary. Involuntary
manslaughter involves committing an act that does not add up to a felony, acting lawlessly or
without due circumspection or caution or a death–causing act. On the other hand, voluntary
manslaughter results from an in–the–heat–of–the–moment act. This paper is an analytical discussion
of Oscar Pistorius' crime.
Oscar Pistorius' Case ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
On 12th September the following year, upon appealing the charges, Oscar was tried and not found
guilty of murder but rather manslaughter. The judge issued a five–year sentence jail term to
Pistorius. In his narration, Mr. Pistorius told the court that on Valentine's Day, the couple had spent
the evening doing various activities: dinner at 1700H GMT and watching television and retiring to
bed between 2100H and 2200H. On the following morning, he woke up early and Reeva asked him,
"Can't you sleep, my baba?" (Oscar Pistorius trial: Evidence – BBC News, n.d.) He further narrated
to the court audience that he had brought two fans from the balcony to keep him comfortable as he
could not sleep. Thereafter, he had heard noise coming from the bathroom. Oscar said, "That's the
moment that everything changed," he said. "I thought that there was a burglar that was gaining entry
to my home." (Oscar Pistorius trial: Evidence – BBC News,
... Get more on HelpWriting.net ...

Who Is Delia Jones: Guilty Or Voluntary Manslaughter?
We, the Jury, find the defendant, Delia Jones, guilty of voluntary manslaughter; the defendant
proves guilty of many aspects of this murder charge. The defendant claims to have been provoked
prior to her actions, telling of how her merciless husband traumatized her through the vicious rattle
snake attacking her after being staged, by her husband, in her laundry basket for her to return to. The
murder of her husband, Sykes Jones, involves an extended period of time between the initial
provocation, Delia discovering the snake that was intended to kill her, and his death. She had many
reasons to murder her husband, but none of them justify or rationalize intentionally taking another
human life.
In the short story "Sweat," it state, "Two months after the wedding, he had given her the first brutal
beating" she also argues with Mr. Jones one night and yells "Ah been married to you fur fifteen
years" (Hurston 2). If Ms. Jones found it so miserable to be a part of their marriage, then why did
she devote 15 years of her life to being ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Jones had many reasons for wanting to rid herself of the terrible monster her husband turned out to
be, but that does not make the act of murdering him justifiable. The night prior to the death of Mr.
Jones, Ms. Jones came home from church with her laundry for the week and went to light a match,
she soon discovered that there was only one solitary match left in the box. After discovering this,
Ms. Jones exclaims in an angry fury, "Dat niggah wouldn't fetch nothin' heah tuh save his rotten
neck, but he kin run thew whut Ah brings quick enough. Now he done toted off nigh on tuh haff uh
box uh matches. He done had dat 'oman in heah in my house, too" (Hurston 6). Ms. Jones' list of
reasons to despise her spouse was growing exponentially, and she had finally reached her limit; we,
the Jury, have reason to believe Delia Jones had motive in procuring the death of her husband,
making Ms. Jones guilty of voluntary

Murder, Manslaughter, And Justifiable Homicide
In the United States the degrees by which a person can be charged with killing another person vary;
the degrees of murder include first, second, and third degree murder, the definitions of which can
vary in legal terms from state to state. These charges are considered to be legally separate from
voluntary manslaughter, involuntary manslaughter, and justifiable homicide which each have their
own definitions (Cole, Smith, & DeJong, 2014). Each type of murder, manslaughter and homicide is
determined by intent and negligible behavior and each will be examined in this paper (Cole et al.,
2014).
Murder
First Degree Murder
Murder has not always been defined by degrees by which the act took place, before the separation
began, murder of any type was a capital offense punishable by death. The state of Pennsylvania in
1793 was the first state to legally distinguish different degrees of murder, possibly to reduce the
amount of murders that resulted in capital punishment (Levinson, 2002). In most states today, first
degree murder is commonly defined as the unlawful, willing, and premeditated murder of another
human being committed with malice aforethought, which is used to indicate a person intended to
kill another person (Berman, n.d.). All states approach murder charges with variations on the same
basic principle, intent.
Second Degree Murder
Like all degrees of murder, second degree murder varies from state to state however in general
terms it is referred to as the unlawful killing

Murder in All Its Forms
Murder: And all its forms Throughout the criminal justice system, news, and in many other
situations the term "murder" is used quite frequently however usually incorrectly. Some people say
animals or even trees get murdered, but under the law it is not murder unless a human takes the life
of another human. Homicide is a lawful term for any killing of a human being by another human
being. Homicide itself is not automatically a crime, some homicides are legal, such as the justifiable
killing of a suspect by the police or a killing in self–defense. Unlawful homicides are classified as
crimes like murder and manslaughter. This paper will explain the important but often overlooked
distinctions between murder and manslaughter, and the ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The defendant could be convicted of 2nd degree murder. Depraved heart murders are unintentional
but extremely reckless murders. For example, playing with a loaded gun and pointing the gun at
another for fun is extremely reckless behavior. If the gun went off and killed another the defendant
was pointing at it could constitute as a 2nd degree murder charge under the depraved heart murder
standard. Manslaughter is the unlawful killing of another human by a human that does not involve
malice aforethought. The absence of malice aforethought means that manslaughter involves less
moral blame than either first or second degree murder. While manslaughter is a serious crime, the
punishment for it is generally less than that for murder. There are two main classes or degrees that
manslaughter falls under. Those are voluntary and involuntary manslaughter. Voluntary
manslaughter is often what is referred to as a "heat of passion" crime. Voluntary manslaughter
occurs when a person is strongly provoked under circumstances that could provoke a reasonable and
rationale person, and kills in the "heat of passion" aroused by that baiting. An example of this would
be where a husband comes home to find his wife committing adultery. The act provokes the husband
to enter such a heat of rage in that moment that he kills the other man right then and

Murder/Voluntary Manslaughter Criticisms and Reforms
A2 law unit 3 model answer
Murder/Voluntary manslaughter criticisms and reforms
Question
Discuss the criticisms which may be made on the law on murder (including voluntary manslaughter)
Suggested answer
It is difficult to divorce criticism of the law on murder without also considering the relevant partial
defences under the Homicide Act 1957. This point was made by the Law Commission in August
2006 when they published the results of their review on provocation and diminished responsibility.
"The law on murder is "a mess" and should be comprehensively reviewed for the first time in more
than half a century" stated the Law Commission in its 2006 report.
The Law Commission said a major overhaul was required – including a re–think of ... Show more
content on Helpwriting.net ...
Under this act the defence of Provocation has been abolished (s.54). The requirement of the loss of
control needing to be 'sudden' has been removed (s.54(2)) this change will make the defence more
available to abused partners who kill in self–defence. This was an issue in the Ahluwalia case where
eventually a diminished responsibility plea was accepted after a lengthy appeal and retrial. The new
defence has also tightened the law (under s.55(6))so the loss of control defence can not be used in
cases where someone has killed for revenge – as in the case of Ibrams and Gregory or for marital
unfaithfulness as in the case of Davies. This may now have dealt with the long term suggestion that,
due to its historical background and the nature of men as more likely to "snap" in anger, that
provocation was a male orientated defence. Another major criticism of the previous defence of
provocation was the reasonable person test (objective test). Prior to the new defence this part of the
provocation defence was left in confusion with the House of Lords decision in Smith(Morgan)
conflicting with the Privy Council decision in Holley and then the Court of Appeal following Holley
rather than Smith(Morgan) thus departing from precedent. This may now be resolved because the
new defence of loss of control under s.54(1)(c) seems to confirm the legal principle set out in Holley
and Camplin.
The major

There Has Been Debate Within The Australian Government
There has been debate within the Australian Government about whether the defence of provocation
should be changed or abolished. Over the years this defence has undergone changes through
interpretation in cases and through legislative amendments. "Provocation; a totally flawed defence
that has no place in Australia criminal law irrespective of sentencing regime". These are the words
of Andrew Hemming, a Senior Lecturer of Law within the School of Law and Justice at University
of Southern Queensland. He states that provocation laws should be completely abolished throughout
the whole of Australia not just in a few jurisdictions (Hemming, 2010). The current provocation
laws in Queensland allow criminals to unethically downgrade their sentence ... Show more content
on Helpwriting.net ...
If a man killed in such a situation, he was viewed as blameworthy but not deserving of the
mandatory death sentence for murder (Toole, 2015). The "loss of self–control" is not literal. If a
person suffers a harsh physical or psychological blow they can literally lose total control. If this
happens, they are acting as an automaton and their actions are not voluntary and can't entice
criminal liability. The loss of control in provocation refers to a state where self–control would have
been challenging, but not impossible.
Provocation has already been abolished in Tasmania, Victoria, Western Australia and New Zealand.
In the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory, the defence has been modified so that
a non–violent sexual advance cannot, without additional factors, constitute provocation. In New
South Wales, non–violent sexual advance cannot provide a basis for provocation, and any other
provocation must be "extreme" (Toole, 2015). The law had been abolished in these jurisdictions due
to the unjust use of the defence that caused public outrage. The law was abolished in 2005 in
Victoria due to the Ramage case, Julie Ramage became a rallying point for law alteration, with
about 3,500 letters calling for change sent to her family to be conveyed to the government.

Gender Equality: Women Serving Less Time Than Men for...
Running Head: GENDER EQUALITY
Gender Equality: Women Serving Less Time than Men for Identical Crimes
Abstract The Federal criminal sentencing guideline which was struck down by the U.S. Supreme
Court in 2005 required that males and females who commit the same crime and have the same prior
criminal history be sentenced equally (Oaxaca, Sarnikar, & Sorensen, 2007). By using data
obtained from the Texas Department of Criminal Justice records, we examine the existence of any
gender–based bias in criminal sentencing decisions (Oaxaca, Sarnikar, & Sorensen, 2007). We
treat the crime as the independent variable, and the time served as the dependent variable that will
determine these truths. Additionally, we control the variables ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Another study which was conducted by psychologists Laurie Ragatz of West Virginia University
and Brenda Russell of Penn State Berks used internet surveys. They used 458 surveys which
explored ways of how prejudice shapes our views on criminal defendants, and how it is ingrained
into our minds throughout our lifetime.
Additionally, this study surrounded a trial that occurred in Texas in 2001, in order to research their
views. In the case in which the study surrounded a male lover who was thrown out the previous day,
and then returned and shot and killed his female lover, and wounded her new lover. All the
participants in the study were given a set of instructions and were told that he was getting charged
with second degree murder. In the study, they were given the option of convicting the defendant on
that charge, going with a less–serious charge of voluntary or involuntary manslaughter, or finding
the defendant not guilty by reason of insanity. In order to destruct levels of uncertainty the
researchers had the participants rank on a scale from 1 to 7, the extent in which they believe the
defendant was guilty. Then they were told to give an appropriate prison sentence from no time to
fifteen more years. For one–quarter of the participants,

Court Observation Paper On Business Law 202
Court Observation Paper
Business Law 202
Fall 2015
Writing
Paragraph transitions are present, logical, and maintain the flow throughout the paper.
The tone is appropriate to the content and assignment.
Sentences are complete, clear, and concise.
Sentences are well constructed, strong, and varied.
Sentence transitions are present and maintain the flow of thought.
The paper–including tables and graphs, headings, title page, and reference page–is consistent with
APA formatting guidelines and meets course–level requirements.
Intellectual property is recognized with in–text citations and a reference page.
Rules of grammar, usage, and punctuation are followed.
Spelling is correct.
Writing: /20
Court case: /40
Case #1: /20
Case #2: /20
Court Observation
On September 14, 2015, I attended a public criminal case at the North County Vista Courthouse.
This case dealt with the murder of Jason Harper, and was presented to Judge Blaine Bowman. Jason
Harper was shot and killed on August 27, 2012 by wife Julie Harper. Harper claimed that she
accidently fired at her husband out of self–defense while the two were arguing in the upstairs
bedroom of their Carlsbad home that morning. Ms. Harper alleges that she was a victim of domestic
abuse and that Mr. Harper had raped her on account of over 30 times during their marriage.
Transition Sentence Prosecutor, Keith Wantanabe claimed that Julie Harper shot her husband with
(1) Conscious Disregard of

Johnny Cade Case Study
Prosecution Against Johnny Cade
Act I (Opening and Evidence)
Johnny Cade should be charged with Voluntary Manslaughter towards Bob Sheldon. In this night
Mr. Cade stabbed Mr. Sheldon to death mercilessly. After Ponyboy Curtis and Johnny Cade were
walking with Sherri Valance and her friend Marcia. Bob and Randy saw that they were walking with
their girlfriends and they became upset, but peacefully took them in their car. Ponyboy and Johnny
returned to the park and fell asleep. When Ponyboy returned home his brother became mad and
roughly smacked him across the face with the back of his hand. Feeling betrayed Ponyboy returned
to the lot with Johnny and they ran away. They relaxed and came to the park to talk. Mr. Sheldon
and Randy approached with friends and expressed their anger with Ponyboy and Johnny. Ponyboy
retaliated calling the peaceful Bob and Randy "White trash". Naturally, being angered by this
response Bob and Randy chased Ponyboy and Johnny around a bit ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Why didn't he try any other option like fighting with fists fairly?
Defense – "Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, he didn't mean to kill Bob Sheldon." He knew that
he was stabbing an occupied person in the back with a knife. What do you expect?
Act III (Closing Statement)
Johnny Cade should with no doubt be convicted of Voluntary Manslaughter against Bob Sheldon. If
any of the blaring pieces of evidence presented were to change your mind, then the fact that neither
Ponyboy Curtis or Johnny Cade were likely going to be hurt. After Ponyboy and Johnny angered the
boys by taking their girlfriends on a walk, disrespectfully falling asleep in a public lot, running away
from home, taking advantage of people under the influence of alcohol, killing someone, stowing
away on a train, and hiding illegally, we all see no reason to not arrest Johnny

Murder In Lord Of The Flies Persuasive Research Paper
Anyone can have a different understanding of what a murder is. Many will understand being
civilized is not murder. Everyday there are arguments over murder and civilized deaths. But on the
contrary, the definition of these words is not understood under the book of laws. Fictional book
"The Lord of The Flies", written by William Golding , is about a group of children who create
parodies in the island, and where they encounter a series of difficulties to survive. The children
argue with one another, however, they try to get along with each other. On the other hand, LOST is a
fictional Tv show with the same background. LOST is about 48 stranded individuals on an
undiscovered island after their plane crashed. They realize by being the only ones ... Show more
Especially, meaning that the death of Piggy was not planned in advance, but, intentionally done. On
the other hand,it is a felony murder as it was not intended, nor, had they planned for Piggy to be
killed. After a few days later of Simon's death; Ralph, Roger, and Piggy had been roaming around
the island and decided to have a tribe meeting with the others. Afterwards, they went to Jack's camp
where they bumped into armed guards who told them to leave. Suddenly, Ralph and Jack started to
argue, meanwhile, Piggy was trying to get the others attention with to conch's rescue alerts.
However, Roger decided to shove a massive rock down the side of the mountain, but, before Roger
and Jack got hit they had time to dodge it. On the side, Piggy was struck by the boulder and was
struck off the mountainside with the shattered conch blown away. Therefore, Piggy's death was
instant after getting struck by the massive boulder (document f). In conclusion, the Tv show
"LOST" and novel "The Lord of The Flies" by William Golding, both have their deaths defined to
murder. However, LOST has a significant role where a civilized decision is encountered. In both, Tv
show and novel, murder is an important role in the actions and outcome of situations. In addition,
descriptive actions to how deaths occur, further research, more communication and more
acknowledge to what certain murder and civilized cases are, in fact, will lead to a better outcome of
daily argued

Examples Of Unfaithful In Othello
Three Unlawful Acts of Love The play Othello by William Shakespeare consists of manipulation
and tragedy, a story of love that ends in demise. Othello, a great general, finds himself at odds with
the notion that his beloved wife has been unfaithful, while Desdemona is completely innocent. He
loves her so much that the idea of her adultery drives him to murder. The ensign to the general, Iago,
is behind the rumors and the turmoil. He manipulates the trust between Othello and those who are
closest to him, even so far as suggesting the method irate Othello uses to kill his wife. However,
despite Iago being the ringleader behind the conflict and crime, Othello would be charged guilty for
first degree murder, criminal conspiracy, and tampering with a witness in a court of law. Iago would
be cleared of any homicide accusations, most likely getting a minimal charge compared to Othello.
Othello committed first degree murder by killing Desdemona. First degree murder is any unlawful
killing done with intent and premeditation, of which Othello is guilty of both. When presented with
Iago's false suspicions of cuckolding, Othello almost instantly writes off his wife as guilty. Iago
plants suspicions into his mind until Othello decides he would rather kill her than deal with a reality
where she was unfaithful. When he plans to strangle instead of poison her is the first step to first
degree murder, as there is aforethought behind the deed. It is notable that Iago did not suggest

Hamlet and His Sanity As Determined in a Court of Law
In the court of law, William Shakespeare's Hamlet will be used as a transcript to determine the fate
of Prince Hamlet as he is responsible for the death of Polonius. With the mask of insanity, Hamlet is
conscious of his actions as he murders Polonius through his malicious intent upon King Claudius.
Also, with Hamlet being in an intense state of emotion during his confrontation of Queen Gertrude,
he intentionally murders Polonius upon adequate provocation which results to voluntary
manslaughter. However, by pursuing King Claudius, Hamlet endangers himself and those close to
him as he relentlessly involves others through his dangerous pursuit. From a legal context, Hamlet is
declared sane when he murders Polonius and will be convicted with ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Hamlet understands the concept of what is morally right and wrong as he mourns the death of his
father due to the fact that his father was a person. The lack of appreciate towards a person is morally
wrong because a person is a human being, and not an object.
In the acceptance stage of grief, Hamlet experiences acceptance of his father's death when he
determines the cause of death was murder. To obtain acceptance, according to Kübler–Ross and
Kessler, the person must accept the realization of the other person's death and recognize their reality
without them (25). At this stage of acceptance, Hamlet acknowledges his father's death as he accepts
the reality of Claudius being king because Hamlet completely believes that Claudius murdered King
Hamlet in order to become king. Also, with acceptance of his father's death, Hamlet alters his
emotion from depression to vengeance towards King Claudius which results in Hamlet moving from
the stage of depression to the stage of acceptance.
In the anger stage of grief, Hamlet releases his anger during the confrontation with Queen Gertrude.
How anger arises, according to Kübler–Ross and Kessler, is only when the person feels safe enough
to express the emotion (11). In this situation, Hamlet did feel secure as he assumed there was not a
single person in the room except for himself and Queen Gertrude. By releasing his anger, Hamlet
begins the

Describe the Extent to Which Recent Reforms to Murder in...
Provocation was previously controlled under S2 of the homicide act 1957, the act stated where a
person kills or is party to a killing of another, he shall not be convicted of murder if he was suffering
from such abnormality of mind as substantially impaired his mental responsibility for his acts and
omissions in doing or being a party to the killing. The new defence S54–56 Coroners and Justice
Act 2009 replaced defence of Provocation S3 Homicide Act 1957; it came into force October 2010.
There are three stages to proving loss of self control. Stage one is the defendant's actions (in doing
or being a party to a killing) must be down to the result of a loss of self control. There is no need for
loss of self control to be 'sudden' however ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
It must be set aside unless connects to incest or rape, this is to prevent use of the defence in honour
killings. But in R v Clinton 2010 sexual infidelity could be taken into account as part of the context.
Clinton had financial problems and his marriage was breaking down as a result of this he was
suicidal. His wife told him that she had slept with 5 different people and also said to him it would
'be easier if he committed suicide.' He attacked her with a piece of wood and strangled her.
The third stage is a person' of the defendant's age and sex with a normal degree of tolerance and self
restraint and in the circumstances of the defendant, might have reacted in the same or in a similar
way to the defendant. If age and sex is not relevant to the conduct then they do not need to be
considered. The normal person must be judged in the circumstances to which the defendant was in,
all characteristics are relevant other than those which stand on general capacity for tolerance or self–
restraint for example being bad tempered. In Holley the defendant killed his girlfriend with an axe.
They both were alcoholics. She told him she had just had sex with another man, he picked up the
axe intending to leave the flat and chop wood, when his girlfriend said 'you haven't got the guts' he
hit her with the axe. The defendant pleaded provocation however it was held that D's alcoholism
should not be

R V. Bizi Case Analysis
Reasonable people will generally go a long distance to protect their loved–ones. However, most
reasonable people would believe that killing someone in order to protect their loved ones would be
immoral and harmful. In the case of R v. Buzizi [2013], a man killed another in a supposed effort to
protect his cousin. On an early morning in Montréal, the accused's cousin and the victim ensued in a
brawl (Casey). The initial fight was broken up by a third party. A few moments later, the accused,
Mr. Buzizi, who saw the initial assault from afar, intervened and pushed the victim (Casey). Then,
Mr. Buzizi noticed that the victim had an exacto knife, and that his cousin had a serious wound on
his neck (R v. Buzizi, para 24). For fear that the ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Buzizi [2013]. The objective requirement needed to prove provocation and reduce the conviction to
manslaughter was not apparent in the case, as a reasonable or ordinary person would likely have left
the area, either by not intervening in the altercation in the first place or by deciding to leave once the
victim had dropped his knife. The subjective requirement needed to prove provocation was not met
either, as Buzizi's recollection of the events suggested that he had full awareness of his actions.
Also, although he had pent up emotions, when the victim dropped his knife, once again, there was
an obvious opportunity for Buzizi to think for a moment and make the decision to get away. This
would have mitigated the feelings of fear Buzizi stated he had felt, and it would not have come at
the cost of a life. However, Buzizi instead made the conscious decision to stab the victim multiple
times, ending his life. Since the appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada was actually accepted, this
spells out a need for the Criminal Code to clarify some of the ambiguities with respect to
provocation. For instance, in Section 232 (2) where it states that an ordinary person is deprived of
self–control, it may be wise to specify the level of proportionality required between the lack of self–
control and the degree of the wrongfulness of the provoking act. If the criminal law allows the threat
of an exacto knife to justify stabbing the holder of that exacto knife multiple times when their guard
is down, then soon the criminal law may allow future actions that are even more disproportionate to
the circumstances to go relatively

Personal Crimes Paper
| Personal Crimes Paper | CJA/314Instructor Fred Sams | | Amber Jackson | 02/05/2011 |
|
Every crime has different characteristics that make it a crime, yet one characteristic that every crime
shares is a perpetrator and a victim. Rape is a big problem in the United States. Each year thousands
of women and men are raped, 17.7 million women have been raped at one point in their lives and
2.8 million men. Rape is considered the most unreported crime in the United States. In the 1970's is
when major awareness started to take shape for victims of rape, such as rape crises centers, medical
protocols, and laws to protect rape victims. Criminal status concerning rape differs from state–to–
state, but the Federal code is ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Manslaughter is the unlawful, but unintentional killing of another human being. Self–defense is
used in assault battery and homicide. Not all states have the same laws when it does not come to the
typologies of homicide, nor does every state consider all of these as a form of homicide. Each state
has their own statutes and laws when it comes to what the punishment and sentence will carry in a
homicide along with the circumstances. Some states do not even consider the crime of passion
homicide, while other states have the make my day law typology of homicide. It is interesting to
research the different characteristics of homicide by each state and what each state considers
homicide by law and the different punishment and sentence. In Colorado, there is the make my day
law, which states that if a person steps on to your property and you feel fear or threatened you, have
the right to kill that person, in Colorado no charges can be brought because the make my day law is
considered justifiable homicide. Robbery and violent theft take place all over the world, not just in
the United States. There are certain types of characteristics that explain robbery and violent theft.
Most robberies and violent thefts are committed by males between the ages of 22– 40 and tend to
decrease with age. Most behavioral characteristics of robbery and violent theft are

Research Paper On Manslaughter And Murder
Murder and Manslaughter
Homicides are defined by criminal law, which refers to a body of federal and state rules, as the
killing of another human being. In general though, there are two classes of homicide: intentional
killings, such as murder, and non–intentional killings, such as manslaughter. Whether murder or
manslaughter, these homicides represents violent felonies.
A murder is an act of extreme violence. It is the intentional, premeditated and deliberate killing of
another human being. In general, there are two different degrees for murder. The first–degree
murder is killing of another person with the intent to cause death with premeditation and
deliberation. Infamous killings such as the murder of the Black Dalia or the murders committed

Importance of Maintaining Your Room and Obeying Orders Essay
Importance of maintaining a clean living environment and following orders.
It is important to maintain a clean and sanitary living environment for multiple reasons. One of the
reasons is that it is a threat to public health in the barracks if even just one of the soldiers is living in
unsanitary conditions, then through frequent contact throughout the day with other soldiers that one
soldier, if he or she becomes sick, could cause other soldiers to become sick. When one soldier
becomes the source of other soldiers being sick then that soldier could be face possible punishment
under Article 134 of the Universal Code of Military Justice for Article 134 states as follows: 934.
ART. 134. GENERAL ARTICLE
Though not specifically mentioned ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Because after all the soldiers barracks room is what they should take the most pride in because it is
the first thing they see in the morning and the last thing they see at night. And every soldier should
want their section chief or squad leader to brag about how squared away their soldier is, because it
starts with their barracks room first thing in the morning and ends with their barracks room last at
night. Also if soldiers are told specifically to maintain a clean and sanitary barracks room then they
are verbally ordered to keep that room clean and thus if they decide to live in an unsuited room that
is consistently filthy and unsanitary then they are violating a direct lawful order and are subject to
Article 92 of the Universal Code of Military Justice which states the following: 892. ART. 92.
FAILURE TO OBEY ORDER OR REGULATION
Any person subject to this chapter who––
(1) violates or fails to obey any lawful general order or regulation;
(2) having knowledge of any other lawful order issued by any member of the armed forces, which it
is his duty to obey, fails to obey the order; or
(3) is derelict in the performance of his duties; shall be punished as a court–martial may direct. And
thus the soldiers leader may at their discretion write the soldier a negative counseling statement and
even recommend the soldier for Universal Code of Military Justice action under Article 92 for "
Failure to

Jim Aikens: Voluntary Manslaughter
In the case discussing Jim Aikens when discussing the charges he should face in regards to the
mailman he could be charged with voluntary manslaughter. Voluntary manslaughter is commonly
defined as an intentional killing in which the offender had no prior intent to kill. The situations
leading to the killing must be one that would cause a reasonable person to become emotionally or
mentally disturbed; otherwise, the killing may be charged as a first–degree or second–degree
murder. On the spectrum of homicides, this offense lies somewhere in between the killing of another
with malice aforethought such as murder and the excusable, justified, or privileged taking of life
that does not constitute a crime, such as some instances of self–defense.

Murder Is A Homicide Crime
Murder Charges
Murder is a homicide crime where there is an intentional killing of a human being by another human
being with malice aforethought. Malice aforethought is what separates murder from other crimes
such as voluntary or involuntary manslaughter ("Free Advice: Law," 2015). Murder can be classified
into different degrees or types, but not all states break them up, but instead name the top type as
capital murder.
First Degree Murder
In most states, first degree murder is defined as the unlawful killing on an individual after planning
or "lying in wait" for the victim ("Find Law," 2015). The act must be performed out of willfulness,
deliberation, and premeditation to be considered first degree murder in most states. Other acts of
violent felonies such as arson, burglary, kidnapping, robbery, and rape that results in a death can
also be charged as first degree murder ("Diffen," 2014).
Willfulness is the intent to end human life, the life does not have to be a predetermined person so
much as it has to be the thought of carrying out the act on another human being. If a person sets out
to kill a human and unintentionally kills a different person the killer can still be charged with first
degree murder ("Diffen," 2014, para. 2). Deliberation and premedication is determined individually
on a case by case basis and it does not mean killer must think at any length of time or plan ahead for
the murder to be considered premeditated ("Find Law," 2015).
The mode of first

Criticisms and reforms or murder and manslaughter
Despite some recent reforms, there are still criticisms to be made of the current law on murder and
voluntary manslaughter. Consider relevant criticisms of that law, and suggest any reforms that may
be appropriate.
Despite recent reforms on the law of murder and voluntary manslaughter; including the special
defence of diminished responsibility and loss of control, there are still inconsistencies present
making the law unsatisfactory. This area of the law is in 'dire need of reform'; as pointed out by the
Law Commission in their 2006 report; Murder, Manslaughter and infanticide. The report stated how
'The Law governing homicide in England and Wales is a rickety structure built upon shaky
foundations.'
One of the main areas pointed out by ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
For this reason I agree with the Law Commission's proposal that a D can plead the defence of duress
if they had no realistic opportunity to seek police protection and showed the courage of an ordinary
person.
Currently if a D aged 18 or over is convicted of murder, the judge must pass a mandatory sentence
of life imprisonment. For offenders aged 10–17 found guilty of murder, the judge must order that
they are detained at Her Majesty's Pleasure. The fact the sentencing is mandatory and the judge has
no discretion leaves a lack of ability to sentence according to blameworthiness, unlike all other
offences which have discretion in sentencing; Gotts. This lack of differentiation between
blameworthiness is further emphasised by the Government's sentencing guidelines laid down in the
Criminal Justice Act 2003. Under this act in cases of murders of police officers or murders involving
firearms D should receive a 30 year sentence. However, in cases like that of Martin (Anthony) such
a sentence would appear unjust.
With regards to the issues mentioned above the Law Commission proposed that murder should be
reformed by dividing it up into two separate offences; first degree murder; and second degree
murder. First degree murder would cover cases where the D intended to kill and where D intended
to inflict serious harm and was aware of the risk of death. Second degree murder would include
cases where the D intended to do serious harm but was not aware there was a risk of

Essay about Criminal Law Midterm
Midterm Criminal Law
State v. Doug
Homicide:
The unlawful taking of the life of one human being by another.
Actual Causation :
The defendant's act must have been the "cause in fact" of the victim's death. Without the defendant's
actions, the victim would not have died.
"But for" Doug shooting and killing Tom, he would not have died.
Proximate Causation:
A defendant's actions are the proximate cause of the victim's death if the result occurs as a
consequence of the defendant's act. There is no other casually connected act. The defendant's
conduct is the direct cause of the harm.
Doug was the sole causal agent, and he brought about Tom's death by shooting and killing him.
Therefore, Doug was the proximate cause of ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Doug will be eligible for reduction to voluntary manslaughter.
Self Defense:
Self defense is a general right to defend oneself against the use of unlawful force. One may defend
oneself with deadly force only if the attacker threatens him with serious bodily harm.
Doug will contend that Tom threatened to "beat him badly", and he was defending himself from
serious bodily harm. Doug believed that he was in imminent danger, had no way to retreat, and that
the use of deadly force was necessary to protect himself.
The Jury will have to decide if Doug's deadly force was excessive. Tom's words carry a threat of

serious bodily harm, but there was no unlawful force taken. Also, the jury will have to decide if
Doug was the initial aggressor.
Defense of Property:
Use of force to defend one's property or one's self from harm is justified.
A homeowner generally cannot use deadly force to defend his property. This is based on the
judgment that human life is more valuable than property.
Doug will argue that he was defending himself and his property and was acting in self defense.
Doug should be able to mitigate a charge of murder to voluntary manslaughter. Because there was
no unlawful force against Doug, self defense will most likely

Criminal Law Essay on Homicide
Criminal Law Essay on Homicide
According to the latest official statistics, there are more than 500 000 cases of homicide every year.
More than 30% of all cases occur in Africa. Americas are on the second place. Asia is known for 5%
of all the cases of homicide that are reported in the world annually. What is homicide? Why does
this problem exist? How can it be solved? Criminal homicide is the action of killing a person by
another person. The killer could have killed the victim intentionally and unintentionally. Despite the
actual intention, both variants are treated like homicide and are punished strictly. When you try to
analyze the problem of homicide, you will learn that there are many types of this crime. I will try to
analyze them ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
They are believed to suffer from psychological diseases. Therefore, many dangerous criminals
receive life imprisonment and constant work with a psychologist or psychotherapist. Nowadays, the
law is more loyal to human life. Thus, the worst criminals are not executed. This issue is very
controversial and disputable.
Manslaughter is another type of homicides that is believed to be less felonious than murder.
Manslaughter is characterized with the particular circumstances of this crime.
Although there is a voluntary manslaughter, the killer is not punished strictly if had to defend
himself, his family or the surrounded people. Moreover, he could be provoked by the victim.
Manslaughter is often conducted in the heat of passion caused by provocation and improper
behavior of the victim. There is also involuntary manslaughter when a person does not intend to kill
another person. Although the killer is provoked, he does not plan anything but to injure or calm
down the irritant. He kills her by mistake or accidentally.
It is very difficult to punish someone who kills another person at war. If we think soberly, people are
supposed to kill one another at war. However, this 'right' touches upon soldiers.
When one decides to kill an innocent person, he can be punished strictly. However, it is difficult to
prove that the crime took place in the whole. If an innocent person is killed at night, the killer will
hardly be punished inasmuch as he could have confused her with

Midterm Contracts
PRACTICE EXAMINATION ISSUE ANALYSIS
CRIMINAL LAW
ESSAY QUESTION 1 OF 1
State vs. Fabio
Homicide
Homicide is the killing of one human being by another.
When Fabio shot Nicholas with a gun and he died, there was a killing of a human being by another.
Actual Causation
Defendant's acts must have been the actual cause of the victim's death, i.e., but for the Defendant's
actions the victim would not have died.
.
"But for" Fabio shooting Nicholas, Nicholas would not have been killed. Fabio is the actual cause of
Nicholas' death.
Thus, Fabio is the actual cause of Nicholas' death.
Proximate Causation
A Defendant's actions are the proximate cause of the victim's death if the result occurred as a natural
and ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Thus, Fabio's actions were willful and wanton conduct.
Therefore, there was malice aforethought.
Fabio will be convicted of murder.
First Degree Murder

First degree murder is one committed with the specific intent to kill, plus premeditation and
deliberation.
Fabio drove to a gun shop and purchased a gun and ammunition. He then drove to Nicholas' home
and made the conscious decision to shoot Nicholas with the gun killing him. Thus, Fabio had the
requisite specific intent to kill.
However, Fabio will argue that he was angry that Nicholas was having an affair with his wife. When
he went to Nicholas' home and asked him about the affair, Nicholas denied that an affair was going
on. This denial of the affair escalated Fabio's anger to the point Fabio shooting Nicholas. Thus,
Fabio acted instinctively and did not have time to deliberate his act. Thus, Fabio will argue that he
had no time to contemplate and appreciate the consequences of his act.
However, it appears from the facts that Fabio purchased the gun with the intent to kill Nicholas.
Therefore, Fabio can be convicted of first degree murder.
Voluntary Manslaughter
Voluntary manslaughter is a killing of a human being without adequate provocation, with a loss of
mental equilibrium and insufficient time to cool off.
When Fabio saw

John Omission Case Study
Student Name: Andrew Ladhams
Student number: 220154039
Topic: Law161 trimester 1 2016 assignment
Word Count: 1658 excluding Bibliography and references in the Footnotes.
'In offences involving injury to the person, and especially in homicide offences, there may be a
degree of remoteness between the act or omission of an accused and the result which is alleged to
constitute an offence'. – Professor Eric Colvin
What criminal offence/s might John have committed?
John has a risk of the following indictments:
1. In the case of William's death John has committed an offence of murder . John had committed an
actus rea of grievous bodily harm resulting in death. John's subsequent failure to render aid
constitutes 'reckless indifference' and John's ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The 'but for' causality tests assists in cases where there is a proximate but not immediate cause of
death . In the case of Royall relying on the case of R v Roberts Ned in his escape almost certainly
did so in apprehension of harm; the apprehension of harm causing flight in turn lead to Ned's death.
Sentencing
In the case of murder, John would be sentenced to life in prison .
In the alternate case of assault causing death whilst intoxicated there is a maximum sentence of 25
years of imprisonment , John faces 8 year minimum mandatory sentence , without the prerogative of
mercy . Self–induced intoxication is does not rescind the mens rea of the act
In the case of manslaughter John faces a maximum sentence of 25 years
In the case of assault occasioning actual bodily harm is liable to 5 years of imprisonment .
In the two cases of common assault, each count has a two year maximum sentence.
In the case of failure to care for Ned there is maximum 5 years penalty .
Bibliography
Cases
Police v Wilson [2012] SASC 38 (14 March 2012) [18].
R v Evans [2009] 2 Cr App R 10.
R v Ferguson [1999]NSWCCA

A Brief Note On Provocation And Its Effects On The Reform...
Provocation is an arising contemporary issue, the effectiveness of both legal and non–legal
responses have significantly impacted on the reform of the laws relating to it. Provocation is a
partial defence act that can be used by someone who has killed another person if they claimed to be
induced with anger or provoked to do it. It can be used to lessen the severity of a charge as the
person can say they were provoked into killing someone, pleading guilty of a charge of voluntary
manslaughter rather than one of murder which has a longer sentence. Current issues that have risen
from this defence are the misuse or rather unfair exploitation of it that has allowed some to get away
with murder. Due to this, reform of the law is needed as ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
To avoid execution the law was made to be more flexible introducing manslaughter which could be
used as a lesser charge to murder.
Legal responses
1. (s 23(a) Crimes Act 1900 (NSW)
A legal response concerning provocation can be shown through in the 'Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) s
23(a)' legislation. This legislation states that provocation can be used under the circumstance that
the deceased induced their own death, this includes words or gestures. The person that killed the
other had to have lost control and killed suddenly without intent. This was what the legislation
stated prior to the amendment, it states the following: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) s 23 (a)
(1) The accused had to be provoked into committing the crime; the jury will have to charge them
with manslaughter rather than murder.
(2) The act causing death under provocation where:
(a) The act caused loss of self–control, including gestures or words from the deceased.
(b) The acts of the deceased would have to provoke an ordinary person making them lose control so
to the point of the intention to kill or cause harm.
(3) There is no laws in which provocation is accepted if:
(a) There is not a reasonable reason
(b) The act was planned and not sudden
(c) They had the intent to kill
(4) The prosecution will have to prove that it was not provocation, beyond reasonable doubt.
The provocation defence can be seen through the 'r v Hill (1981)' case. In this case Georgina

Irish Cases that Discuss the Meaning of Intention Essay
Irish Cases that Discuss the Meaning of Intention There are only two reported Irish cases which
discuss the meaning of intention, one in the context of attempted murder,and the other in the context
of capital murder. These cases rely on the relevant English authority pertaining to the definition of
'intention', and so it is proposed to deal mainly with the latter cases here. Both the Irish and English
cases are set out below in chronological sequence.
Following DPP v Smith, the next major case in this area of the law to ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Accordingly, as this state of mind was held to be a species of malice aforethought, it was not strictly
necessary to decide whether the accused actually intended to kill or cause grievous bodily harm.
Nevertheless, various views were expressed as to whether foresight of probable consequences
would amount to intention in the strict sense.
Lord Hailsham adopted the definition of intention laid down by Asquith L.J. in the civil case of
Cunliffe v Goodman:
"An 'intention', to my mind, connotes a state of affairs which the party 'intending'...does more than
merely contemplate. It connotes a state of affairs which, on the contrary, he decides, so far as in him
lies, to bring about, and which, in point of possibility, he has a reasonable prospect of being able to
bring about by his own act of volition."
Lord Hailsham also indicated that foresight of probable consequences was not the same as intention.
Although foresight of probable consequences (or degrees of likelihood) was an essential factor that
should be placed before the jury in determining whether the consequences were intended, the two
concepts were distinct.
Although Viscount Dilhorne did not find it necessary to decide whether knowledge of a high
probability constituted the necessary intention, he inclined towards the view that such knowledge
did constitute the necessary intention.

The Murder Of A Green Light
Chief Justice Bird dissented with the majority that second degree murder should not be applied that
believes that the prosecution had to prove two elements of implied malice which are an intent to kill
and a conscious disregard with life. She believes that the majority fail to show the existence of these
two elements in this case. The facts showed that the act of speeding through a green light can be
dangerous, but it is not an act likely to cause the death of another individual. Also, it was 1 a.m. and
the witness testified that there was no other cars around. She compares the defendant's actions to
those of the defendants in People v. Fuller (1978). In this case, the defendants fled from the police
during an attempted auto burglary and began to drive on the wrong side of the road. This happened
in an early Sunday morning, so many cars had to swerve and avoid the defendants. They ran a
redlight and went through two police cars that were trying to block him off. They ran a second red
light and hit a car which resulted in the driver 's death. Chief Justice Bird compares the facts of that
case to this one. She compares how in this case the defendant did not run a red light where the
collision occurred and the streets were empty since it was 1 a.m. She does agree that driving while
being under the influence does make driving more dangerous and can cause more accidents, but he
does not believe that driving under the influence is not enough evidence to establish an act to kill

Criminal
A School Resource Officer(SRO) is a job that I grew to like during my internship at OCSO. My first
weeks at my internship I worked a lot with SROs. My daily duties consisted of monitoring students,
writing reports, and being a mentor for students. Also, I assisted several officers with varies projects,
in which we presented to the students. Sheriff Murant informed me that our alternate goal is to
creating and maintaining a safe ,secure ,and suitable learning environment for students,teachers, and
staff. Every since I have started working with the different SROs , I can truly say that the work
really hard to make sure every duty is completed with proficiency. I observed how a lot of students
looked up to Sheriff Murant as a mother. They ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
They are proactive. Having a SRO deters crime.
Murder is a crime which is committed by a person who kills another human Also, its killing a
person with malice and without justification . This crime is considered the most serious crime
offense. Depending on the conditions of the case, a person convicted of murder could be sentenced
to many years in prison , a sentence with no possibility of parole or even death. In South Carolina,
there different degree levels when dealing with a murder cases. There are; first degree and second
degree. First degree " cold blooded" is usually planned with intentions on killing a specific person.
This crime can also be determined by the way the person was actually killed. First degree is looked
at as , a crime that was premeditated,cruel and very violent. All first degree convictions gives a
person a punishment of a possible lifetime in prison without parole or the death penalty. Second
degree is a crime of murdering someone in a heat of passion. In a heat of passion a person
sometimes have intense anger,fear,rage,or terror. Second degree is also characterized as a death that
ended from assault . Second degree murder is a crime that falls between first degree and involuntary
manslaughter. A second degree conviction gives a person mandatory life sentence without the
possibility of parole for 11– 25 years. Sometimes third degree is also used, but its usually called

Boo Radley Character Analysis
Two children walking home from a play late at night. They could barely see each other so how
could they see the man who was following them or even the one who killed that man.
Stealthy, suspicious, violent, and even crazy. These are all traits are thought to have been carried by
this cold hearted killer, and they all point to one man. Boo Radley. Even the name sends shivers
down the spines of the residents of Maycomb. In the small town of Maycomb, Alabama,
Scout and Jem finch were walking walking home from a play late at night when all of a sudden they
found themselves on the ground, Jean felt a man being jerked back towards the ground, like he was
being attacked. Boo Radley is responsible for killing that man, formerly known as Mr.
Ewell. Thus, Boo Radley is guilty of voluntary manslaughter. Although many may argue that
Boo Radley is innocent, a closer examination proves that Boo Radley is guilty: He has been in a
constant cycle of abuse, was very connected to the Finch children, and killed a man under
inappropriate manner.
Boo Radley and his inevitable knack for violence were caused by the constant cycle of abuse Boo
considers to be his life. For example, Walter tells of one of Boo Radley's strategies of unleashing
harm amongst the schoolchildren, "Almost died first year I come to school and et
Caryl 2 them pecans – folks say he pizened 'em and put 'em over on the school side of the fence."
(Lee
31). Boo Radley's menacing actions of intentionally poisoning and harming these children prove his
violent nature caused by the abuse he faced throughout his life. He did not have a single reason to
terrorize these children, not one. A study conducted by Psychology Today found that
"white male children that are dangerously antisocial are one of the most likely children to harm or
kill their parents" (Why Kids Kill Parents 1). Boo Radley just happens to be white, male, and very,
very antisocial. He is so antisocial that his inexperience of reality could alter his idea of right and
wrong and make him more prone to hurting or abusing someone. Many may argue that
Boo's violent tendencies died down and he never got into anymore trouble after his father's
punishment of keeping him inside but his hate for his father grew

The Ethics Of The California Penal Code Essay
California Penal Code; 187 is very well known, refers to murder. Murder is defined as the unlawful
killing of a human being, or a fetus, with malice aforethought. Indeed, we the people like to
question every law to know the punishment. Murder has different levels accompanied with different
scenarios. Throughout this paper, I will be discussing and analyzing the following: degrees of
murder, Felony Murder Rule, and manslaughter. In the United States the degrees of murder were
created by legislatures. Pennsylvania was the first state to depart from common law in 1794, that
divided murder into first and second degree. (Samaha, pp333). The elements of common law murder
are: actus reus voluntary act of killing another person, mens rea express or implied malice
aforethought, circumstances 1. victim reasonable person or human being and 2. all person except
alien enemy in times of war, all lead to the harm (Samaha, 2015). The elements of modern law are
actus reus, mens rea, causation, death, and attendant circumstances if any. First–degree murder is
the only crime in which the death penalty can be imposed, consisting of premeditated, deliberate
intent to kill murders, and felony murders. First–degree has to be willfully committed meaning the
intent to kill, purposely, knowingly, and at common law a specific intent. In this degree atrocious
means wicked, cruel, or brutal and heinous means hateful. They are important terms that help define
the punishment. First–degree murder

Jamie Hayes: Guilty Of Voluntary Manslaughter
Your honor, I respectfully request that you find the defendant, Jamie Hayes, guilty of voluntary
manslaughter. As you can see from our witness's testimony, we have shown beyond a reasonable
doubt that Jamie Hayes, is indeed guilty of manslaughter. Our first witness, Lou Williams, head of
campus security, explained the specific details of every incident involving the track team and
campus security. Alongside this, Lou Williams also told us that the security department was well
trained and prepared for any incident that was to occur. All security officers were licensed to carry
firearms and to use them if necessary. Furthermore, she stated that they hired Lee Valdez based off
his respectable credentials and that he was a great officer to work with. During Valdez's time, recent
events involving police brutality raised some serious concerns amongst many of the students at
CCU. Since then, the students have held two rallies on excessive use of force by law enforcement,
and with this, the security department has noticed a change in the students' attitudes towards
authority. In response to this, Lou Williams conducted monthly training meetings with her staff on
how to deescalate tense situations. Despite what defense may say otherwise, Campus Security did
have a procedure that was followed on the night of the incident on May 15, 2014. ... Show more
Through Detective Thomas's investigation of the scene of the incident, she concluded that Jamie
Hayes was able to see and hear the altercation between Casey Barns and Lee Valdez clearly from
(his/her) location. Terry Thomas also says that she had probable cause to arrest Jamie Hayes because
upon examining Casey Barn's neck, the location where (he/she) was allegedly being choked and on
the brink of death, had no visible marks. {Jamie Hayes stated in questioning that and I quote,
"Valdez is a jerk, he got what he deserved." This shows that Jamie Hayes acted with implied malice,
as is stated in Calcrim 520 point (4) which says that– he or she acted deliberately with conscious
disregard for human life. Even though Jamie Hayes did not know that Lee Valdez was going to die,
(he/she knew full well that she had harmed him enough so that paramedics had to arrive.} Upon
investigating social media, Terry Thomas noticed that Casey Barns' social media accounts were
inactive while Jamie Hayes' social media were very active in the recent months, specifically in a
twitter group called "CCU against police brutality." One specific tweet caught the attention of the
Detective and that was the tweet from April 3rd at 11:30 p.m. which stated that "Law Enforcement
has gone too far. We

Disadvantages Of Texting While Driving
Texting and driving has become a recent issue in today's world. Many teens, as well as adults, have
formed a habit of texting while driving. Texting while driving is distracting and the possibilities of
getting into a car accident while texting and driving are higher than if you are not. Texting while
driving has gotten so ridiculous the government has realized this is an ongoing problem that is
causing accidents. In attempting to prevent this, new laws have been passed, making the use of cell
phones while driving a car, illegal. However, too many people do not respect or pay attention to this
law which put many people lives at risk. There are several disadvantages of texting while driving,
including jail time/prison, fatal crashes, and loss of lives. One disadvantage of texting while driving
is encountering jail time/imprisonment. Over the ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Some of the injuries may be broken bones or the loss of a body part, also may lead to concussions
and comas. These fatal crashes may put people in the hospital for weeks to months. Some people
may end up in a temporarily or permanently paralyzed. (The National Safety Council) reports that
cell phone use while driving leads to 1.6 million crashes each year. Nearly 330,000 injuries occur
each year from accidents caused by texting while driving. 1 out of every 4 car accidents in the
United States is caused by texting and driving. Texting while driving is 6x more likely to cause an
accident than driving drunk. Texting while driving causes a 400% increase in time spent with eyes
off the road. Highway crashes cost the USA $871 billion a year, new study finds. Total includes both
economic costs and societal harm. The total includes $277 billion in economic costs, nearly $900 for
each person living in the USA, and $594 billion in societal harm from the loss of life and the pain
and decreased quality of life because of

Personal Crime Analysis
Personal Crime Analysis
Personal crimes are crimes committed against a person, which affects the victim in a personal way.
Personal crimes consist of homicide, assault, battery, mayhem, rape, and statutory rape. This paper
will identify, define, and differentiate these types of personal crimes.
Homicide "is the killing of one human being by another human being" (Schmalleger & Dolatowski,
2010). There are three different types of homicide, which are justifiable, excusable, and criminal.
Common law puts criminal homicide into two groups: murder and manslaughter. The Model Penal
Code categorizes criminal homicide into murder, manslaughter, and negligent homicide.
Justifiable homicides are legal killings acceptable by law, and society. ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
(1) Murders that is premeditated and committed willfully and deliberately. (2) Murders committed
during perpetration or attempted perpetration of an enumerated felony, such as arson, rape, robbery,
or burglary; and (3) all other types of murder (Schmalleger & Dolatowski, 2010)
Manslaughter is the second form of homocide and is defined as the unlawful killing of an individual
without premeditiation and malice. If there was no intent to cause death or bodily harm that is likely
to cause death, but the person that caused the death was negligent then it is considered
manslaughter. There are two types of manslaughter and they are called voluntary and involuntary.
Voluntary manslaughter involves killing in the heat of passion, in self–defense, or while commiting
a felony. These are all instances in which the offender had no prior intent to kill. The circumstances
caused a reasonable person to act in manner of being emotionally disturbed. Involuntary
manslaughter is the unintentional killing of an individual during a lawful act. An individual charged
with involuntary manslaughter can still be held criminally liable because of criminal negligence but
not to the degree of murder. An example of involuntary manslaughter would be a lifeguard that
failed to attempt to save a person drowning while he or she was on duty.
Negligent homicide are untentional killins that may constitute involuntary

Voluntary Manslaughter
An unlawful killing, although done with an intent to kill or inflict great bodily harm, is not murder
but voluntary manslaughter if committed in the heat of sudden passion caused by adequate
provocation (Unis, 2008 p. IV65). Let's say Bill witnesses his wife having sex with another man in
their house. Bill goes insane, finds a nearby weapon and kills the stranger with his wife. Most likely
the state would charge Bill with voluntary mans slaughter because it was during the "heat of
passion". Self–defense cases can relate to this topic as well. Self–defense can be applied if he or she
provides enough proof that they were not the aggressor that started it; and convincing the jury it was
justifiable. If the situation does not seem rational than he or she could face voluntary manslaughter.
If you have Netflix, go check out the fifth episode in the twentieth ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
A group of young adults got into a huge fight over a rivalry. A young man named John Surles was
shot to death during the fight. The man who shot him was charged with murder serving a 35 year
sentence. According to the article, if he looked into the plea deal before he went to trial than he
could have just gotten charged with mans slaughter. Now he has to serve 35 years instead of seven.
As time passed, the convicted murderer decided to reinstate the plea deal. His attorney felt that
adequate provocation manslaughter should have been informed during the trial. The defendant
claimed the shots were not intentionally, but accidental. He tried to secure the gun while it was
slipping off his person, but he secured it not properly, which led to the shots. Sadly, there was a lack
of evidence or findings to be convicted for manslaughter instead. According to the attorney, "had
counsel requested an adequate provocation instruction there is a reasonable probability the jury
would have convicted on manslaughter rather than murder". He should have accepted the plea deal

Crj 320 Wk 5 Quiz 5 Chapter 8 and 9
CRJ 320 WK 5 QUIZ 5 CHAPTER 8 AND 9
To purchase this visit here: http://www.activitymode.com/product/crj–320–wk–5–quiz–5–chapter–
8–and–9/ Contact us at:
SUPPORT@ACTIVITYMODE.COM
CRJ 320 WK 5 Quiz 5 Chapter 8,9
MULTIPLE CHOICE
1. Which of the following factors can assist in establishing time of death?
a. victim's clothing c. rigor mortis
b. presence of weapons d. hair color
2. The type of "lust murderer" who is usually of above–average intelligence, methodical and
cunning, and socially skilled, and who tricks victims into situations in which he can torture and then
murder them, is called a(n),
a. serial killer. c. disorganized offender.
b. organized offender. d. mass murderer.
3. Which ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
a. defense wounds c. wounds under clothing
b. hesitation wounds d. weapon tightly clutched
18. Murder is classified as
a. excusable homicide. c. criminal homicide.
b. nonfelonious homicide. d. justifiable homicide.
19. Most cases of hanging are
a. homicides. c. suicides.
b. accidents. d. accidental homicides.
To purchase this visit here: http://www.activitymode.com/product/crj–320–wk–5–quiz–5–chapter–
8–and–9/ Contact us at:
SUPPORT@ACTIVITYMODE.COM
CRJ 320 WK 5 Quiz 5 Chapter 8,9
MULTIPLE CHOICE
1. Which of the following factors can assist in establishing time of death?
a. victim's clothing c. rigor mortis
b. presence of weapons d. hair color
2. The type of "lust murderer" who is usually of above–average intelligence, methodical and

cunning, and socially skilled, and who tricks victims into situations in which he can torture and then
murder them, is called a(n),
a. serial killer. c. disorganized offender.
b. organized offender. d. mass murderer.
3. Which of the following statements is not true with regard to death investigations?
a. Body temperature drops 2 to 3 degrees in the first hour after death.
b. Rigor mortis appears first in the smaller muscles, such as those of the face.
c. After about 36 hours, rigor mortis usually disappears in the same sequence as it appeared.
d. Maximum lividity occurs within 15–20 hours after death.
4. Premeditation would be a

Proven Guilty
Regarding whether the defendant CJ can be charged with 'Murder', depends on several different
factors. In front of the law CJ is not legally able to be charged with criminal responsibility, being
only thirteen and not above fourteen years of age. Thus, in this situation, 'Doli Incapax' acts as a
rebuttable presumption. This essentially means that because of CJs age, his behaviour is under the
context of being 'incapable or unable to form an intent to commit a crime'. Nevertheless, an
assumption is made by a court that CJ is 'innocent until proven guilty'. This statement is valid,
unless and until the other party strongly contests the decision, and proves otherwise. Rebuttable
presumptions are regularly linked with 'Prima Facie' evidence, which involves evidence that is set
before the trial. This kind of proof is extremely important, as it needs to sufficiently prove the
defendant's claim, unless there is substantial inconsistent evidence presented at trial favouring the
prosecutor. As the Children law states, the test for 'Doli Incapax' involves 'prosecution must rebut
the presumption of doli incapax as an element of the prosecution case, the child knew the act was
seriously wrong as opposed to naughty, and the evidence relied upon by the prosecution must be
strong and clear beyond all ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The case R v LMW (1999), concerns a 10–year–old boy defendant, who was charged with the
manslaughter of six–year–old Corey Davis, who drowned on the 2nd March 1998. The defendant
had dropped the victim into the Georges River, having knowledge that Corey was unable to swim.
The defendant was found not guilty of manslaughter, as the jury supported the defence case that the
drowning of Corey had been 'an act of bullying that went wrong'. Henceforth, this is a classic
example of a case which signifies how the intent (Men's rea) was not present, though Actus Reus
being evident, leading to

Felony: What Is Murder?
What is murder? Murder is the unlawful killing of an individual with malice aforethought (Siegel,
2015). There are several classifications of murder. The most serious is first–degree murder, which
involves premeditation and deliberation (Siegel, 2015). Felony murder is the killing of a person in
conjunction with a felony such as, rape or robbery (Siegel, 2015). The next degree of murder is
second–degree murder. This is total disregard for the victim's life and the desire to inflict serious
bodily harm that results in death (Siegel, 2015). Manslaughter is a homicide without wrongful intent
(Siegel, 2015). Manslaughter is further defined in two separate categories. Voluntary/non–negligent
manslaughter is a killing of passion or as a result of ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
These neighborhoods are comprised of residential and commercial properties mixed together
(Siegel, 2015). The neighborhoods with high revolving populations do not have a stable, established
population therefore the residents are not vested in their community. Constant movement of people
in and out of these neighborhoods weakens and retards attempts in solving neighborhood problems
or developing common goals (Siegel, 2015). For example, the lack of neighborhood watches,
participating in voluntary organizations, and lack of community being able to control teenage
groups has a direct effect on crime and victimization (Kubrin and Weitzer, 2003). People who live in
these high crime areas become mistrusting and suspicious, this is known to create a siege mentality
(Siegel, 2015). A siege mentality is defined as the outside world trying to destroy the particular
neighborhood. Police are highly mistrusted in these areas. Adolescents in these areas, because of the
breakdown in family and social institutions are susceptible to gang recruitment. Clifford R. Shaw
and Henry McKay, two Chicago sociologists made social disorganization theory popular. Their
research focused on inner city Chicago. They developed nine concentric circles, where the poorest
occupied the first two circles which has the highest crime rates and the outer–most circle which had
the least

Manslaughter Case Study
TAQ 1
There are unquestionable sections of offences taken into consideration when determining the facts
and giving orders in court. These can be an action of wrong doing or a crime which an individual
did up to his/her choice without a conscious thought. Diminished responsibility can minimise a
crime from a maximum sentence of murder to a lower sentence of manslaughter. Diminished
responsibility involves a person murdering another person and the person who committed the crime
will not be declared guilty of murder, but will be declared mentally unstable. For example, a less
advanced state of mind or someone who might have been involved in an accident and his or her
mind persuades them to commit a crime which is beyond their control.
Homicide ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
He made silent and abusive phone calls; he took photos of her when she was not looking and sent
hate mails. As a result she suffered a severe depression. The courts had to examine if such
depression comprised of assault under Person Act (1861), if the accused could be liable under
section 20 with no intention for bodily harassment. The courts decided to rule the depression as
assault. Following this conclusion Protection from Harassment Act (1997) was applied, which
permitted cases of R v Burstow (1997) to be sentenced

Manslaughter Persuasive Essay
Upon Google searching (2017), "define manslaughter", one will discover that is is "the crime of
killing a human being without malice aforethought, or otherwise in circumstances not amounting to
murder." In other words, manslaughter is the unintentional act of killing a human being. After
Google searching (2017), "define murder", it is evident that it is "the unlawful premeditated killing
of one human being by another." Alternatively, it means one human being plans to kill another
human being and does it. Is taking a person's life due to driving under the influence an intention or
unintentional wrongdoing? Some may attest that the intoxicated driver did not conspire to kill
someone, therefore, it is manslaughter. Others may inquire that the ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Most of the states in the United States consider driver under the influence and kill someone,
vehicular manslaughter. According to Stim (2015), Alaska, Montana, and Arizona are the only three
states that more often than not charge defendants with murder over manslaughter in vehicular deaths
caused by driving under the influence. To put it in perspective, 94% of the states in the United States
prefer manslaughter convictions over homicide. Vehicular manslaughter is broken down into two
divisions. Vehicular manslaughter with gross negligence and vehicular manslaughter with ordinary
negligence. Gross negligence comes from driving that is extremely reckless. Ordinary negligence
spawns from the driver failing to take the precautions as a typical driver, and injury/death is caused.
For example, if an intoxicated driver is swerving all over the road and strikes a car that results in
death for the opposing driver, that would be gross negligence. Now if an intoxicated driver fails to
yield properly and t–bones a car that results in death of the other driver, that would be ordinary
negligence. If a defendant is found guilty of vehicular manslaughter, they face at least 4–10 years
behind bars for each person killed. Therefore, if a car has two people in it that were killed, the
sentencing can be doubled. In comparison, if a murder charge sticks, the defendant's sentence can
range from 10 years to lifelong imprisonment. McCurley (2014) argues that both of the drivers
involved in the accident could be found to be intoxicated. "If one driver lives and the other dies,
why should the driver that survives be charged with murder?" He is saying that both drivers can be
at fault as they were both intoxicated. The reason we lock away homicidal people is because of their
mental state. We do not want them to be able to roam the free world and possibly commit murder
again. When people drive under the influence and take a life, that does

Oscar Pistorius Murder

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from Erica Smith

More from Erica Smith (6)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Oscar Pistorius Murder