To: Sam Cree
I always thought that crimes of "passion" were given lesser sentences because they were arguably "intentional."
Premeditated for personal gain murders seem to come into the category of intentional and, as such, would be eligible for the death penalty. Intentionally murder for personal gain would fall under the category of malicious. (Mal intent.)
Certainty then would apply to:
1) Guilt for the murder itself. You'd have to be certain.
2) Guilt for intention. You'd have to be certain it was intentional.
3) Guilt for malicious intent. You'd have to be certain the murderer did so for personal gain.
A person who is found certainly guilty of the murder, but who can sucessfully fend off accusations of intentionality and of commission of crime for personal gain, would have a sentence lesser than capital punishment.
This is getting pretty deeply into categories that have probably been well thought out through the years by those in the legal profession.
We'll just use their categories.
The only thing we'll change is the stand of "guilty within a reasonable doubt" when it comes to a capital crime. We'll replace it with a standard of "unimpeachable certainty."
66 posted on
10/01/2003 9:41:06 AM PDT by
xzins
(And now I will show you the most excellent way!)
To: xzins
I think it is "beyond a reasonable doubt."
Back later, an interesting discussion, thanks.
67 posted on
10/01/2003 9:42:52 AM PDT by
Sam Cree
(Democrats are herd animals)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson