John Schilling wrote:
>
> On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 14:31:23 GMT, Beowulf Bolt <abd.al-hazred@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> wrote:
> >
> >It's not murder in my mind if Dexter ultimately had no intent to harm
> >D.
>
> So if I drive past the local school at a hundred fifty miles per hour
> just as class is getting out, *intending* to neatly slalom around all
> the kiddies, I'm not a murderer even if one of them zigs when I was
> expecting him to zag?
Do you think that a reasonable jury member will buy that the odds of
slamming into schoolkids while slaloming as you describe is comparable
to the risks of ones psycho ex-girlfriend unexpectedly tracking your
movements and deciding to get all murderous? Otherwise there is a
possibility that the difference in predictability of the outcome might
play a role in whether or not he is found guilty. The concept of
reckless indifference
> >Dexter is *responsible* for D.'s death, yes, but that's not the same
> >thing as murder.
>
> It is according to my dictionary, and the statutes of I believe every
> state in the Union, and common law, and in common usage.
Bull****.
The Criminal Code of Canada (you might note from my email address
where I am posting from) defines murder as being when "the person who
causes the death of a human being means to cause his death, or means to
cause him bodily harm that he knows is likely to cause his death, and is
reckless whether death ensues or not". Clearly not the case here.
The US Code, at Title 18, defines murder as "the unlawful killing of a
human being with malice aforethought." Whilst he waffled on the matter,
D.'s death was not due to "malice aforethought" on the part of Dexter.
The original definition by Sir Edward Coke in 1597 was that "murder is
when a man of sound memory, and of the age of discretion, unlawfully
killeth within any country of the realm any reasonable creature in rerum
natura under the King's peace, with malice aforethought, either
expressed by the party or implied by law, so as the party wounded, or
hurt, etc. die of the wound or hurt, etc. within a year and a day after
the same."
The American Heritage dictionary defines it as "to kill (another
human) unlawfully," yet Dexter did not perform the killing.
WordNet defines it as the "unlawful premeditated killing of a human
being by a human being".
The Kernerman English Multilingual Dictionary defines it as "(an act
of) killing a person on purpose and illegally".
Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary defines murder as "to deprive
of life, animal or vegetable, in any manner or by any means; to render
inanimate; to put to death; to slay." Furthermore, it goes on to
clarify "A man may kill another by accident or in self-defense, without
the imputation of guilt. To murder is to kill with malicious forethought
and intention."
I could go on, but the point is made.
I don't disagree with you that the *statutory* definitions of murder
in western nations also include the concept of felony murder, wherein by
committing a felony against D., Dexter is *legally responsible* for all
that ensued, but that still clearly does not fit the common useage of
the term 'murder'. Moreover I suspect you already know this. If you
were to poll the viewers of the show whether 'Dexter murdered D.', I'm
sure you know what the overwhelming response would be.
> > Is that clearer?
>
> Yes, but it's also clearly wrong. You're using an idiosyncratic
> personal definition of "murder" that does not foster effective
> communication, and you're trying to make a moral distinction that
> simply isn't there.
If you are going to posture like an arrogant prick, John, it might
behoove you to actually be *correct* on the matter. Word of advice.
My "idiosyncractic personal definition" matches both the criminal code
of the country I inhabit, as well as the common dictionary definition of
a score of sources, and most im****tantly for the purposes of this
debate, common useage.
Biff
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------
"All around me darkness gathers, fading is the sun that shone,
we must speak of other matters, you can be me when I'm gone..."
- SANDMAN #67, Neil Gaiman
-------------------------------------------------------------------
|
