New murder law for abused women

[jonno24]

So i was watchinh the news this morning and all that they were talking about was that if abused women snap and kill their abusive husband/boyfriend then they have the rite to appeal it was only manslaughter.

Now i dont understand this as the other law change also says that if a man is provoked into murdering his wife/girlfriend then he has no rite to appeal manslaughter.

now i know that it isnt as common as female abuse but im sure there are a hell of alot of men out there who are abused by their wife/girlfriend. And this law basically says that they wont be able to protest it was manslaughter if they kill her.

I just dont get it ?

[BlabyFox]

So i was watchinh the news this morning and all that they were talking about was that if abused women snap and kill their abusive husband/boyfriend then they have the rite to appeal it was only manslaughter.

Now i dont understand this as the other law change also says that if a man is provoked into murdering his wife/girlfriend then he has no rite to appeal manslaughter.

now i know that it isnt as common as female abuse but im sure there are a hell of alot of men out there who are abused by their wife/girlfriend. And this law basically says that they wont be able to protest it was manslaughter if they kill her.

I just dont get it ?

yeah, the law discriminated aginst men more than women these days- with divorced couples with children thw woman always gets the custody, etc. i think this would be a good change if they gave the same rights for men

[Guest]

If you are charged with murder, you can plead either provocation or diminished responsibility (constructive manslaughter). It is a kind of defence, as the sentences are lower.

Provocation involves something said or done to the defendant that made him react almost immediately. With domestic violence, this has two problems in that firstly women "do not snap", and it is difficult to prove that they do (we apparently are slow burners - they haven't seen me lose it). The other is the immediacy - suffering years of abuse from a partner is not provocation.

Diminished responsibility, without getting technical, is akin to an insanity plea. Not quite, but near enough to mean a woman who uses this not only has to prove she wasn't in the her "right mind" but will then be labelled "a nutter", for want of a better word.

Neither of these defences do not really cover the circumstances where women have suffered years of abuse and then snapped. Reforms were talked about when I did criminal law over 2 years ago, and it's about time they were looked at.

[jonno24]

If you are charged with murder, you can plead either provocation or diminished responsibility (constructive manslaughter). It is a kind of defence, as the sentences are lower.

Provocation involves something said or done to the defendant that made him react almost immediately. With domestic violence, this has two problems in that firstly women "do not snap", and it is difficult to prove that they do (we apparently are slow burners - they haven't seen me lose it). The other is the immediacy - suffering years of abuse from a partner is not provocation.

Diminished responsibility, without getting technical, is akin to an insanity plea. Not quite, but near enough to mean a woman who uses this not only has to prove she wasn't in the her "right mind" but will then be labelled "a nutter", for want of a better word.

Neither of these defences do not really cover the circumstances where women have suffered years of abuse and then snapped. Reforms were talked about when I did criminal law over 2 years ago, and it's about time they were looked at.

Never understood law me but i just think that murder is murder and should be sentenced accordingly.

I suppose that if a female kills her husband/boyfriend and then pleads that he beat her constantly then she will have to prove it ?

[Guest]

yeah, the law discriminated aginst men more than women these days- with divorced couples with children thw woman always gets the custody, etc. i think this would be a good change if they gave the same rights for men

As seen in my previous response, the "defences" for a murder charge actually favour men (provocation, certainly).

As for divorces, this is the area of civil law, and the courts have a duty to put the best interests of the child before those of the parents. As women are usually the primary carer, it shouldn't be that surprising to see residence orders being made in favour of the mother. As for the Fathers 4 Justice, whilst there are cases where men are unfairly treated, these are a small proportion of the cases that go through the family courts each year. A recent development that has taken place is that the family courts are going to have to be more "open", thus making them more accountable (hearings are not heard in public, as with other areas of law).

[AoWW]

If you are charged with murder, you can plead either provocation or diminished responsibility (constructive manslaughter). It is a kind of defence, as the sentences are lower.

Provocation involves something said or done to the defendant that made him react almost immediately. With domestic violence, this has two problems in that firstly women "do not snap", and it is difficult to prove that they do (we apparently are slow burners - they haven't seen me lose it). The other is the immediacy - suffering years of abuse from a partner is not provocation.

Diminished responsibility, without getting technical, is akin to an insanity plea. Not quite, but near enough to mean a woman who uses this not only has to prove she wasn't in the her "right mind" but will then be labelled "a nutter", for want of a better word.

Neither of these defences do not really cover the circumstances where women have suffered years of abuse and then snapped. Reforms were talked about when I did criminal law over 2 years ago, and it's about time they were looked at.

I'd get away with this, no probs.

[Guest]

Never understood law me but i just think that murder is murder and should be sentenced accordingly.

I suppose that if a female kills her husband/boyfriend and then pleads that he beat her constantly then she will have to prove it ?

Oh yes, and in the criminal courts you have to prove beyond reasonable doubt (high probability). The prosecution has to prove that the person committed the crime, but if there is a defence available, then the burden of proof moves to the defendant to prove the defence. One of the downsides with murder is that pleading either provocation or diminished responsibility is it is an admission you killed that person, and if you can't prove the defence and be found guilty of manslaughter, you will be found guilty of murder.

It's not an easy subject to get your head around! I'm surprised I remember this much!!

[Guest]

I'd get away with this, no probs.

I know the feeling.

[billyfox1]

So i was watchinh the news this morning and all that they were talking about was that if abused women snap and kill their abusive husband/boyfriend then they have the rite to appeal it was only manslaughter.

Now i dont understand this as the other law change also says that if a man is provoked into murdering his wife/girlfriend then he has no rite to appeal manslaughter.

now i know that it isnt as common as female abuse but im sure there are a hell of alot of men out there who are abused by their wife/girlfriend. And this law basically says that they wont be able to protest it was manslaughter if they kill her.

I just dont get it ?

What a load of bollox. This country's judicial system is crap. Perhaps men have to appeal womanslaughter? What is this country coming to?

I'm suprised it's still called manslaughter. Went for pub lunch the other day for a ploughman's pie and it had been changed to Ploughperson's pie. Both sexes should be able to appeal personslaughter.

[Number 6]

Why not just punish domestic abuse more severely?

[Guest]

Why not just punish domestic abuse more severely?

It's not the punishment that is the problem, but the lack of women coming forward to report abusive partners.

[Raj]

It's not the punishment that is the problem, but the lack of women coming forward to report abusive partners.

What about men who get abused????

[Guest]

What about men who get abused????

Even less likely to report it, but for different reasons.

[Raj]

Even less likely to report it, but for different reasons.

Oh.....the shame of it all!!!!

P.S Hope you are well????

Im off now Bye!!!

[Lovejoy]

So i was watchinh the news this morning and all that they were talking about was that if abused women snap and kill their abusive husband/boyfriend then they have the rite to appeal it was only manslaughter.

Now i dont understand this as the other law change also says that if a man is provoked into murdering his wife/girlfriend then he has no rite to appeal manslaughter.

now i know that it isnt as common as female abuse but im sure there are a hell of alot of men out there who are abused by their wife/girlfriend. And this law basically says that they wont be able to protest it was manslaughter if they kill her.

I just dont get it ?

This country has turned into such a fecking joke . As a bloke, I now find myself yearning for equality!

I shall now await the inevitable "politically correct" criticism .

[Daggers]

This country has turned into such a fecking joke . As a bloke, I now find myself yearning for equality!

I shall now await the inevitable "politically correct" criticism .

I am looking at the BBC account of this and I see no mention of sex - it appears to be aimed at both sexes. Could it be that this entire thread is based on the ranting of a daytime Radio chatshow?

[Bellend Sebastian]

I am looking at the BBC account of this and I see no mention of sex - it appears to be aimed at both sexes. Could it be that this entire thread is based on the ranting of a daytime Radio chatshow?

Or an inaccurate and sensational report in a shit newspaper? I refuse to believe it. Daytime television and the tabloid media are the only pillars of truth in a world of lies. Or something.

Women will probably gain the most from this, but if they're most disadvantaged by how things are it's hardly unfair, is it?

[Houdini Logic]

This law is insane.

Manslaughter means you did not intend to kill someone.

Just keep it as murder, but reduce the jail term because of the situation

[Austin]

This law is insane.

Manslaughter means you did not intend to kill someone.

Just keep it as murder, but reduce the jail term because of the situation

This seems most logical ..

[Guest]

I give up....

[Bellend Sebastian]

I give up....

But you have so much to live for.

Possibly

[Guest]

But you have so much to live for.

Possibly

I have Equity & Trusts next term. Surely that's enough to tip one over the edge.

[Bellend Sebastian]

I have Equity & Trusts next term. Surely that's enough to tip one over the edge.

I should think it is. What are you studying, if you don't mind me asking?

[Guest]

I should think it is. What are you studying, if you don't mind me asking?

LLB Law. I want to be a barrister, as I would look bloody good in the wig and gown. I also excel at the finger pointing and saying "I put it to you" in a patronising tone.

[purpleronnie]

I actually thought there was a law that if a women was abused and they killed there partner the sentence is reduced.

Reminds me of someone over here in the states who wasn't even prosecuted after killing her husband, after it was revealed she was abused by him.

Seems the laws concerning this are a lot tougher in england.

Its a difficult one, one half of me thinks its a good change the other thinks why didnt she just leave, she had the choice.

But moreover I just can't understand how a man could hit a women.