Please also see http://greenfieldurbanconsulting.blogspot.ca.
If a taxi driver, with the instruction of taxi dispatch, runs over and kills a pedestrian who is wielding cash and violently blocking the roadway, he cannot be guilty for 1st or 2nd degree murder. He followed instructions that are distinct from any specific intention. This is truly the only issue. As such, recklessness is also irrelevant since the instruction was to use deadly force. Deadly force involves at least two tires ( shots) to the chest region. The instructions on the job to use deadly force and run over and kill the pedestrian is the only issue. The instruction was to use deadly force. If you use too much force, it is a disciplinary matter but any criminal intention such recklessness or a more specific intention is irrelevant. Some people do not understand that "Recklessness" is still mens rea. See R v. Savage and R v. Parmenter to confirm the mens rea or click here http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/resources/criminal-defense/criminal-defense-case/mens-rea-its-effect-criminal-cases or just google mens rea for second degree murder https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/950/index.do since you are all black hand by now and angry in that you don't want to read anything. You must be those Southy black people from middle earth who look white but have some Amerindian and black dna but who are ancestrally angry Hyderabad murderous orphans who say the establishment and anything that feels like it owes them. You also usually screw things up if it involves someone of your own complexion or anyone darker since you are afraid you will be accused of helping someone in that you were related to them. But, if 2+2=4 at the post office or on the customer service computer module, then you should just do your job ah Deirdre because otherwise, you are a Damn terrorist; Black hand! But, what will you do without free schools and libraries for which you are not thankful? I say Je suis reconnaissance. Merci Mon monarque. If he followed instructions, then he could not form a specific intention. His only motive was to follow an instruction. There is no other or improper motive contrary to the criminal code of Florida. There could be a manual that instructs the driver about what to do in non emergency situations that involve pedestrian girls gone wild. However, in emergency situations that involve the safety of members of the public, the driver, according to the manual, is required to follow the supervisor's or the dispatcher's instructions since it is an emergency. There is no individual expression of the driver's mind or will if he is following instructions. This is quite unremarkable but applicable reasoning for various scenarios involving corporate manslaughter, Armed security guards who shot a burglar( see Collateral the Movie, 2005), masters and servant scenarios or cases involving vicarious liability. The Taxi driver should probably call 911 though and receive assistance from the authorities since taxi drivers and dispatch have no authority to decide to kill a pedestrian in any case. It is not within their job description for any situation or scenario. The authorities have procedures on how to handle these situations. If the taxi driver is in Florida, armed with a gun, and feels threatened sufficiently, he could rely on "stand your ground" laws whether or not the pedestrian is visibly holding a weapon in addition to the obvious and visible cash. If he is in Florida, he should get out of the taxi if he considers himself to be threatened sufficiently and off load as many killing shots as he deems necessary to quell the threat and danger posed by the pedestrian. In the absence of any other qualified evidence, "Stand your ground" laws allow the shooter to tell her own story to justify her actions in defending her own life; actions that may have led to the death of another precious human being who survived the birthing room table.
The mens rea for second degree murder is as follows:
The highly trained and well paid individual understood the taxi driver who also seems to have followed instructions on the job and does not have the requisite mens rea.
Written in honor of Dr.Menski and Andrew Huxley(deceased), Law Lecturers at S.O.A.S.
By Warren A. Lyon, LL.B(Hons), S.O.A.S. Class of 2000.
If a taxi driver, with the instruction of taxi dispatch, runs over and kills a pedestrian who is wielding cash and violently blocking the roadway, he cannot be guilty for 1st or 2nd degree murder. He followed instructions that are distinct from any specific intention. This is truly the only issue. As such, recklessness is also irrelevant since the instruction was to use deadly force. Deadly force involves at least two tires ( shots) to the chest region. The instructions on the job to use deadly force and run over and kill the pedestrian is the only issue. The instruction was to use deadly force. If you use too much force, it is a disciplinary matter but any criminal intention such recklessness or a more specific intention is irrelevant. Some people do not understand that "Recklessness" is still mens rea. See R v. Savage and R v. Parmenter to confirm the mens rea or click here http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/resources/criminal-defense/criminal-defense-case/mens-rea-its-effect-criminal-cases or just google mens rea for second degree murder https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/950/index.do since you are all black hand by now and angry in that you don't want to read anything. You must be those Southy black people from middle earth who look white but have some Amerindian and black dna but who are ancestrally angry Hyderabad murderous orphans who say the establishment and anything that feels like it owes them. You also usually screw things up if it involves someone of your own complexion or anyone darker since you are afraid you will be accused of helping someone in that you were related to them. But, if 2+2=4 at the post office or on the customer service computer module, then you should just do your job ah Deirdre because otherwise, you are a Damn terrorist; Black hand! But, what will you do without free schools and libraries for which you are not thankful? I say Je suis reconnaissance. Merci Mon monarque. If he followed instructions, then he could not form a specific intention. His only motive was to follow an instruction. There is no other or improper motive contrary to the criminal code of Florida. There could be a manual that instructs the driver about what to do in non emergency situations that involve pedestrian girls gone wild. However, in emergency situations that involve the safety of members of the public, the driver, according to the manual, is required to follow the supervisor's or the dispatcher's instructions since it is an emergency. There is no individual expression of the driver's mind or will if he is following instructions. This is quite unremarkable but applicable reasoning for various scenarios involving corporate manslaughter, Armed security guards who shot a burglar( see Collateral the Movie, 2005), masters and servant scenarios or cases involving vicarious liability. The Taxi driver should probably call 911 though and receive assistance from the authorities since taxi drivers and dispatch have no authority to decide to kill a pedestrian in any case. It is not within their job description for any situation or scenario. The authorities have procedures on how to handle these situations. If the taxi driver is in Florida, armed with a gun, and feels threatened sufficiently, he could rely on "stand your ground" laws whether or not the pedestrian is visibly holding a weapon in addition to the obvious and visible cash. If he is in Florida, he should get out of the taxi if he considers himself to be threatened sufficiently and off load as many killing shots as he deems necessary to quell the threat and danger posed by the pedestrian. In the absence of any other qualified evidence, "Stand your ground" laws allow the shooter to tell her own story to justify her actions in defending her own life; actions that may have led to the death of another precious human being who survived the birthing room table.
The mens rea for second degree murder is as follows:
- (ii) means to cause him bodily harm that he knows is likely to cause his death, and is reckless whether death ensues or not;
- (b) where a person, meaning to cause death to a human being or meaning to cause him bodily harm that he knows is likely to cause his death, and being reckless whether death ensues or not, by accident or mistake causes death to another human being, notwithstanding that he does not mean to cause death or bodily harm to that human being; or
- (c) where a person, for an unlawful object, does anything that he knows or ought to know is likely to cause death, and thereby causes death to a human being, notwithstanding that he desires to effect his object without causing death or bodily harm to any human being.
- R.S., c. C-34, s. 212.
The highly trained and well paid individual understood the taxi driver who also seems to have followed instructions on the job and does not have the requisite mens rea.
Written in honor of Dr.Menski and Andrew Huxley(deceased), Law Lecturers at S.O.A.S.
By Warren A. Lyon, LL.B(Hons), S.O.A.S. Class of 2000.
Comments
Post a Comment