Kicks to the head will be enough for a murder charge, but rarely it seems enough for a jury to convict. I've had three defendants (I think) acquitted of murder in those circumstances, whereas one who was convicted did a lot more besides.It's not an exact science. The Preddie brothers who killed Damilola Taylor were only convicted of manslaughter, despite giving him a gash in his leg deep enough to sever an artery. No evidence of an intention to kill, but to cause serious harm? I'd have thought so, but they weren't even tried for murder.Horrible world in which we live. Wouldn’t fancy your job at all. The Damilola Taylor case was about 30 years ago? You’d have thought things might’ve moved on since then? Maybe not.
BBC News - Dalian Atkinson: Jury fails to reach decision about second officerhttps://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-shropshire-57595434
Quote from: Legion on June 24, 2021, 03:12:40 PMBBC News - Dalian Atkinson: Jury fails to reach decision about second officerhttps://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-shropshire-57595434I don't know whether any of our lawyers can explain this to me, but I've always wondered what the determining factor is between a jury coming to a majority verdict and failing to reach a decision?Presumably they fail to reach a decision because they don't agree with each other. So in that case, why don't they just go with a majority verdict? Isn't that the point of having several people on a jury? Or is it the case that if they're genuinely split down the middle - six for, six against - that's when they fail to reach a verdict?
Unbelievable. Also extremely believable.https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/jun/28/dalian-atkinson-killing-officer-was-kept-on-despite-gross-misconduct
There are not many places that would not sack someone over undisclosed Criminal cautions / convictions in a job application. Doubly surprised the Police did as it sounds like it was found when they started a check on the National Database which they didn't have back then.
Quote from: Sexual Ealing on June 28, 2021, 01:40:07 PMUnbelievable. Also extremely believable.https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/jun/28/dalian-atkinson-killing-officer-was-kept-on-despite-gross-misconduct"During the trial, the jury had noticed that Monk was not offering evidence of his good character. In a note sent to the judge, they queried why this was the case and were told to focus only on the evidence before them."This is often a problem for the defence. With hindsight I bet they wish they'd disclosed the cautions to the jury. There's always the danger that they'd speculate about why they're not hearing about his good character, and assume there's (worse) things they're not being told. If it's not that bad or relevant (and if it was the prosecution would be applying to admit it in the trial anyway) the defence are probably better off volunteering it to end the speculation.Anyway, the prosecution are suggesting the correct starting point is one of 'High' culpability at 12 years. I don't know if the defence accept this, but it seems likely. Sentence tomorrow at 2pm.
Quote from: Sexual Ealing on June 28, 2021, 01:40:07 PMUnbelievable. Also extremely believable.https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/jun/28/dalian-atkinson-killing-officer-was-kept-on-despite-gross-misconductyour second half of the statement is the most important and it isn't limited to police in the UK. I would put money on it being everywhere. Certainly we have seen situations like that in Canada, it has been proven very common in the US. Cops look after cops and the union hide and shield their members all the time. When you condone the behaviour you embolden the members who form the culture.