#1
http://news.bbc.co.uk/panorama/hi/front_page/newsid_8366000/8366280.stm

So basically if you are with a group of people and one of them kills someone you are just as guilty as them.

To me this sounds like a ridiculous idea. By the logic in this when democratic countries allow atrocities to occur then they are just as responsible as the perpetrators as they just stood by and let it happen.

I find it hard to believe this law hasn't been changed and is favoured by the police.

What do you guys think?
#4
To be honest, this isn't anything really new. The UK has no good neighbour principle (like France for example) which means that you can just stand by a person dying without doing anything - however there is such a thing as an omission or "a failure to act" when there is a duty of care to act. I would assume that being part of a gang attaches this duty if you witness a member beating another person to death.

It makes sense and I have no idea what you're talking about Threadstarter. It reduces the amount of deaths each year and gives people a clear moral responsibility. The law isn't as simple as you make it out to be - it's most certainly not a case of being guilty just because a member of your gang has killed someone. There are several quirks in the law which may exempt you from prosecution if you act reasonably in such situations.
¤´¨留話 請留話 請在我說完後
¸.•´¸.•´¨¸.•¤¨哭泣我不在這裡 我不在那裡請在嗶一聲之後留
(¸.•´ (¸.•´ .•´(´¸.•¤´`¤下自己的秘密請在嗶一聲之後對話筒沾自喜請在嗶一聲之後對空氣唉聲嘆氣


我不在這裡 我人在哪裡 我想到哪裡¤

請在嗶一聲之後留下有聲的話題¤

請在嗶一聲之後分擔感情的問題¤


¤¤¤

Last edited by Harmonius at Nov 23, 2009,
#5
Quote by Harmonius
To be honest, this isn't anything really new. The UK has a no good neighbour principle (like Franch for example) which means that you can just stand by a person dying without doing anything - however there is such a thing as an omission or "a failure to act" when there is a duty of care to act. I would assume that being part of a gang attaches this duty if you witness a member beating another person to death.

It makes sense and I have no idea what you're talking about Threadstarter. It reduces the amount of deaths each year and gives people a clear moral responsibility.


Hey, you're back!!

On topic, I like those types of laws. Actually, they need to be more extensive, and aggressively enforced. Mob mentality FTL
Bluegrass Rocks

CYNONYTE!

Quote by Basti95
People only come here to get sigged anyway


Quote by Basti95
Rats, I thought someone would sig it and make me famous...

it was going to be my big break

#6
Quote by millerdrr
Hey, you're back!!

On topic, I like those types of laws. Actually, they need to be more extensive, and aggressively enforced. Mob mentality FTL


So if you were with a friend and he got in an arguement with some guy who was being a douche. You are on his side and your friend pulls out a knife and stabs the guy to death.

You'd be quite happy to be arrested for murder?
#7
To be honest, this isn't a Dick in a box. The UK has a no good Dick in a box principles (like Franch for example, who excell in the Dick in a box area) which means that you can just stand by a person Dicking without doing anything - however there is such a thing as an omission or "a failure to act" when there is a duty of care to act. I would assume that being part of a gang attaches this duty if you witness a member beating another persons Dick in a box

It makes sense and I have no idea what you're talking about Threadstarter. It reduces the amount of deaths each year and gives people a clear moral responsibility.
#8
Quote by Greenie_777
So if you were with a friend and he got in an arguement with some guy who was being a douche. You are on his side and your friend pulls out a knife and stabs the guy to death.

You'd be quite happy to be arrested for murder?


Again, you're completely ignoring the substantive law that you have no idea about. It's not as clear cut and simple as you make it. The law you describe cannot be summarised in one half paragraph, as you make it out to be.

Quote by millerdrr
Hey, you're back!!

On topic, I like those types of laws. Actually, they need to be more extensive, and aggressively enforced. Mob mentality FTL


I'm back for Christmas, thanks for remembering me. I'll be off again after Christmas though.
¤´¨留話 請留話 請在我說完後
¸.•´¸.•´¨¸.•¤¨哭泣我不在這裡 我不在那裡請在嗶一聲之後留
(¸.•´ (¸.•´ .•´(´¸.•¤´`¤下自己的秘密請在嗶一聲之後對話筒沾自喜請在嗶一聲之後對空氣唉聲嘆氣


我不在這裡 我人在哪裡 我想到哪裡¤

請在嗶一聲之後留下有聲的話題¤

請在嗶一聲之後分擔感情的問題¤


¤¤¤

#9
I'll have to tell my friends to stop shooting people while I'm there.
The B-52 Bombers Group!
Own a B-52 amp? Join the club!

Quote by nashawa
He may be a troll, but he's an incredibly successful troll. So kudos on that.
#10
Quote by Greenie_777
So if you were with a friend and he got in an arguement with some guy who was being a douche. You are on his side and your friend pulls out a knife and stabs the guy to death.

You'd be quite happy to be arrested for murder?


I wouldn't be happy about being arrested even if I was the one who did it. That doesn't mean I shouldn't be arrested. I had responsibilities: trying to stop it, yelling for help, fleeing to look for a policeman, restraining my friend....anything other than standing by and watching.
Bluegrass Rocks

CYNONYTE!

Quote by Basti95
People only come here to get sigged anyway


Quote by Basti95
Rats, I thought someone would sig it and make me famous...

it was going to be my big break

#11
I don't know exactly what this law provides for but I would imagine it is something like section 66(2) of New Zealand's Crimes Act. Seriously, it's fine and it works well.
Quote by Greenie_777
So basically if you are with a group of people and one of them kills someone you are just as guilty as them.

Quote by Greenie_777
So if you were with a friend and he got in an arguement with some guy who was being a douche. You are on his side and your friend pulls out a knife and stabs the guy to death.

You'd be quite happy to be arrested for murder?

I don't think this is correct at all. Again, I draw my understanding from NZ's s66(2) - basically, there's three important things to remember:
1) The unlawful act (stabbing) must occur in the pursuance of an unlawful common purpose
2) You must be intending to pursue that unlawful common purpose
3) You must know that the unlawful act (killing with a knife + requisite mens rea) is a probable consequence (meaning real and substantial risk) of pursing that unlawful common purpose.

Chill.

However, under New Zealand law at least, you will be liable for manslaughter if you knew a knife was being carried, even if you didn't contemplate death occurring...

Edit: I just wiki'd the English law - it seems it's just ordinary party liability (?!) like NZ's s66(1), that's even harder to find a party to murder than what I described above. You need to intend to aid/abet etc the principle in doing the act (killing) with knowledge that the principle will kill with a murder mens rea state.
Last edited by Kiwi Ace at Nov 23, 2009,
#12
there's a simple way of avoiding this law.

don't commit an unlawful act in a group.
Rhythm in Jump. Dancing Close to You.

Quote by element4433
Yeah. people, like Lemoninfluence, are hypocrites and should have all their opinions invalidated from here on out.
#13
Quote by Lemoninfluence
there's a simple way of avoiding this law.

don't commit an unlawful act in a group.


Define unlawful . What about sado-masochism and freedom of expression and a right to a private [and family] life?
¤´¨留話 請留話 請在我說完後
¸.•´¸.•´¨¸.•¤¨哭泣我不在這裡 我不在那裡請在嗶一聲之後留
(¸.•´ (¸.•´ .•´(´¸.•¤´`¤下自己的秘密請在嗶一聲之後對話筒沾自喜請在嗶一聲之後對空氣唉聲嘆氣


我不在這裡 我人在哪裡 我想到哪裡¤

請在嗶一聲之後留下有聲的話題¤

請在嗶一聲之後分擔感情的問題¤


¤¤¤

#14
Its not that black and white. I'm sure if your with a friend and he goes crazy and randomly shanks someone your not gonna be charged. Its different when you just watch and are involved. I tend to not let myself get in those situations tho. Dont know bout you.
Fuck rights, I believe in something... even a guy like Merlin you know?
#16
Quote by Kiwi Ace
Do you know if there has been any change in the English position from R v Brown recently, Harmonius? England's consent law is crazy...


R V. Brown - no, that case still stands as good law apparently coming from LexisNexis. Quite frankly, the defendants were only found guilty because the judges considered it disgusting and I'm sure a lot of us do too. Personally, I'm for freedom of expression and a right to private life in this context provided that there is no intention to kill [rather than an intention to harm] because it really is none of my business. What's your take?
¤´¨留話 請留話 請在我說完後
¸.•´¸.•´¨¸.•¤¨哭泣我不在這裡 我不在那裡請在嗶一聲之後留
(¸.•´ (¸.•´ .•´(´¸.•¤´`¤下自己的秘密請在嗶一聲之後對話筒沾自喜請在嗶一聲之後對空氣唉聲嘆氣


我不在這裡 我人在哪裡 我想到哪裡¤

請在嗶一聲之後留下有聲的話題¤

請在嗶一聲之後分擔感情的問題¤


¤¤¤

#17
R v brown is still good law I think...

Unfortunately.

I like how you can consent to being beaten senseless I'm a ring for the entertainment of others, but not for your own entertainment.
Rhythm in Jump. Dancing Close to You.

Quote by element4433
Yeah. people, like Lemoninfluence, are hypocrites and should have all their opinions invalidated from here on out.
Last edited by Lemoninfluence at Nov 23, 2009,
#18
Quote by Lemoninfluence
R v brown is still good law I think...

Unfortunately.

I like how you consent to being beaten senseless I'm a ring for the entertainment of others, but not for your own entertainment.


That's different. It's conducted by a referee. In R V. Brown, one of the guys was actually a Doctor and I suppose that ought to have made a difference in getting the defendants acquitted.
From what I remember, one of the defendants was also a 17-year old . God, that's so wrong.
¤´¨留話 請留話 請在我說完後
¸.•´¸.•´¨¸.•¤¨哭泣我不在這裡 我不在那裡請在嗶一聲之後留
(¸.•´ (¸.•´ .•´(´¸.•¤´`¤下自己的秘密請在嗶一聲之後對話筒沾自喜請在嗶一聲之後對空氣唉聲嘆氣


我不在這裡 我人在哪裡 我想到哪裡¤

請在嗶一聲之後留下有聲的話題¤

請在嗶一聲之後分擔感情的問題¤


¤¤¤

#19
Quote by Harmonius
R V. Brown - no, that case still stands as good law apparently coming from LexisNexis. Quite frankly, the defendants were only found guilty because the judges considered it disgusting and I'm sure a lot of us do too. Personally, I'm for freedom of expression and a right to private life in this context provided that there is no intention to kill [rather than an intention to harm] because it really is none of my business. What's your take?

The judgments of the majority were terrible - full of personal prejudice. I agree, FOE/privacy should have won the day in Brown, but I think there are probably justifable limits on whether a defence of consent is available. In New Zealand we ended up following the minority in Brown. Whereas the majority took a results based test (i.e. consent cannot apply as soon as there is actual bodily harm) the minority/NZ used a public policy based test - consent is always available as a defence unless, on balance, public policy considerations out weigh rights and freedoms (except for murder).
#20
O_o Where the hell did all the law students suddenly materialise from?
.
#21
Quote by Kiwi Ace
The judgments of the majority were terrible - full of personal prejudice. I agree, FOE/privacy should have won the day in Brown, but I think there are probably justifable limits on whether a defence of consent is available. In New Zealand we ended up following the minority in Brown. Whereas the majority took a results based test (i.e. consent cannot apply as soon as there is actual bodily harm) the minority/NZ used a public policy based test - consent is always available as a defence unless, on balance, public policy considerations out weigh rights and freedoms (except for murder).


I love that argument - public policy this and that. It's just an easy way for Lord Reid to start talking a load of crap and for Lord Salmon to conclude, "yeah...I'll agree, that is all..."

How are you getting on with your studies by the way? Have you graduated yet?
¤´¨留話 請留話 請在我說完後
¸.•´¸.•´¨¸.•¤¨哭泣我不在這裡 我不在那裡請在嗶一聲之後留
(¸.•´ (¸.•´ .•´(´¸.•¤´`¤下自己的秘密請在嗶一聲之後對話筒沾自喜請在嗶一聲之後對空氣唉聲嘆氣


我不在這裡 我人在哪裡 我想到哪裡¤

請在嗶一聲之後留下有聲的話題¤

請在嗶一聲之後分擔感情的問題¤


¤¤¤

#23
Quote by Harmonius
I love that argument - public policy this and that. It's just an easy way for Lord Reid to start talking a load of crap and for Lord Salmon to conclude, "yeah...I'll agree, that is all..."


Quote by Harmonius
How are you getting on with your studies by the way? Have you graduated yet?

They're going well, three years down, two to go. I'm starting honours next year which is exciting. How about you?
#24
Quote by Kiwi Ace


They're going well, three years down, two to go. I'm starting honours next year which is exciting. How about you?


Awesome stuff, Kiwi, keep it up. I'm at BPP Law School now so I aim to qualify, God-willing by next year June. If it doesn't go tits up, I'll be able to find myself a good job within the next two years. Gotta get a lot of work experience - as you know it's so competitive.
¤´¨留話 請留話 請在我說完後
¸.•´¸.•´¨¸.•¤¨哭泣我不在這裡 我不在那裡請在嗶一聲之後留
(¸.•´ (¸.•´ .•´(´¸.•¤´`¤下自己的秘密請在嗶一聲之後對話筒沾自喜請在嗶一聲之後對空氣唉聲嘆氣


我不在這裡 我人在哪裡 我想到哪裡¤

請在嗶一聲之後留下有聲的話題¤

請在嗶一聲之後分擔感情的問題¤


¤¤¤