To think you don’t “accidentally” strangle someone to death?

[DrizzleandDamp]

I give up, no murder conviction for this man:

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8884251/Police-officer-41-not-guilty-murdering-wife.html

There is no point me pursuing my case when these are the decisions made!

It’s just like that case where the guy said he was playing a ‘sex game’ with his girlfriend and ‘accidentally’ killed her. He got some poxy sentence and is already out

@diddl

How was it decided then that loss of control was applicable in this case I wonder?

This was used by his defence and was accepted by the jury (and judge). They followed the law as written. As I said previously this defence was introduced partly as a defence for victims of domestic violence but due to the way it is drafted it was applicable in this case. I don't like it one bit - unintended consequences of (in my mind) badly worded legislation

At least the judge sentenced him at the upper end of the guidelines

[quote FarTooSkinny]@Watermelon999

In my mind, with absolutely no experience of the legal system, it still feels that sentencing has become more lenient in recent times and that taking a life is not seen as as big a deal as it was in the past, but that may be just my perception.

This is a common misconception. The prison population has increased by about 28% since 2000, and governments (both Tory and Labour) have consistently increased sentencing guidelines[/quote]
Is it the media then with its own agenda?

I don’t profess to be an expert in this field, it’s purely what I feel from reading the news.

Things like knife crime often being manslaughter when they have chosen to carry a knife in the first place.

@Nicknacky

Watermelon999 Really? You can’t think of circumstances where that wouldn’t be the case?

Well apart from self defence, or freak accident, no not really

It is absolutely clear from the judge's sentencing judgment that he thought the man guilty of murder. Do the judge has done what he can by a sentence at the high end of what he is allowed to give for manslaughter
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/breaking-married-police-officer-jailed-22913508?utmsource=mirrorrnewsletter&utmmedium=email&utmmcontent=Mirror12at23&utmcampaign=dailyy_newsletter&ccid=2052616

@Watermelon999

Is it the media then with its own agenda?

You have answered your own question there. The media very much has an agenda in this space - making noise about judges being soft on criminals sells newspapers. Politicians also like to grandstand on the issue of sentencing.

Things like knife crime often being manslaughter when they have chosen to carry a knife in the first place.

Do you have examples of this?

It seemed that way to me too, TooTrusting. It's not much of a consolation, but at least the judge imposed a longer sentence than some people feared be would.

The secret barrister tweets gives the interpretation that Brehmer ran a defence based round unlawful act involuntary manslaughter, but that the judge chose to sentence for voluntary manslaughter with a partial defence of loss of control reducing this from a murder conviction. This meant that the judge could pass a higher sentence than if the explanation of accident put forward by the defence was accepted so in this case the loss of control assumption has actually been detrimental to the perpetrator.

Women mean nothing it seems.

7 years for a woman’s life. Pathetic.

Stabbed himself in the arm with a penknife ffs. What a child.

This defence was introduced in 2010, partially as a defence for victims of abuse who lose their control due to a serious fear of violence. And what we have here is unintended consequences of a well meaning piece of legislation.

This is important I think because people often get upset when cases don't have quite the outcomes they think they ought to, and then they want to somehow add rules or tweak things to make sure they do.

But changes are not going to have only that one effect.

What people really seem to struggle with in cases like this one is that it is so difficult to prove intent, even when the jury thinks something likely happened with intent. And the fact that the presumption of innocence always means there is a good chance many guilty people will be found innocent.

But changing those basic elements of the legal system would have all kinds of systemic effects, some of them pretty horrible.

Another thought I had on this case is that the CPS has had a 30% budget cut over the last decade. So there is the possibility that the prosecution just didn't have the capacity or capability to build an effective case. That's pure speculation though

I think this was always going to be a difficult case as he admitted to manslaughter so the case itself wasnt about his guilt or whether he did it but his intent.

As I have said before I think he did intend to do so, I think the judge thought that as well but can any of us actually say that he went into it 100% intending to kill. Because it would be difficult to create a case for 100% and fairly easy for the defence to introduce that 1% doubt

They were right to do so though the CPS ultimately he got a sentence for voluntary manslaughter rather than involuntary

Before the 2/3 sentence came in (Last year I think) it was usual to serve 50% - the starting point for murder without a weapon is 15 so around 7.5 years.

A minimum 7 year term is a good result. Even for life sentences the average time served is 14/15 years

I've just looked at the loss of control as a defence & there's obviously a lot we don't know as I don't see how that could be used at all!

Smile/Prufrocks
Yes, it's really quite bleak. And reading my post back it's a bit muddled ... I was responding to an earlier post which implied (although already being angry about this case I accept that bias could have coloured how I read it) that maybe the victim nagging him and putting pressure on him could have tipped him. I meant to say it doesn't matter a joy how a woman behaves, she's still the victim. Unless the perpetrator is a man in which case it's a "crime of passion".

Thanks to all posters here and in other threads for sharing their knowledge and experience in these matters. Whilst it doesn't make the reality any less nasty it's really helpful for the likes of me to see just how flawed against us the system is.

doesn't matter a jot*

www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/18829124.judge-passed-manslaughter-sentence-timothy-brehmer/

The local paper explains how the judge approached sentencing

Having a small knowledge of the legal system and sentencing processes I do think this was a good result - the judge clearly set out the aggravating and mitigating factors and that he did not believe his unlawful manslaughter plea

If 7 years is too low sentence that is a reflection of the sentencing system as a whole (and an overcrowded prison system). 7 years is a long time for him to be in prison - perhaps not long enough but hopefully enough to be a deterrent

@Chanjer

I think if you knowingly engage in a violent action that's likely to result in death then it should be murder and not manslaughter

He's a policeman, trained in restraint technique and fully knowledgeable that excessive pressure to the neck can very easily result in death. Having prior knowledge of such techniques should be an aggravating factor in deciding your charge

There's a school of thought that says you can actually die or have permanent injury caused in hardly any time, which is one of the reasons that erotic asphyxia is so dangerous. Apparently related to the combination of arteries being compressed

THIS^^. I’m so sorry for her family. Can’t believe this outcome, just hope there are grounds to appeal what seems to many to be a gross miscarriage of justice.

@SurferRona

THIS^^. I’m so sorry for her family. Can’t believe this outcome, just hope there are grounds to appeal what seems to many to be a gross miscarriage of justice.

This is not a miscarriage of justice. A miscarriage of justice occurs when a person is convicted and punished for a crime that they did not commit. Also, The Crown cannot appeal - unless significant new evidence in very particular circumstances comes to light a person cannot be tried for the same offence twice

Politicians also like to grandstand on the issue of sentencing.

Tough on crime rhetoric tends to be popular with the public and a vote winner, particularly for more right win parties. So they will often try and convince people that it would be much better if people were in prison longer.

@Goosefoot

Politicians also like to grandstand on the issue of sentencing.

Tough on crime rhetoric tends to be popular with the public and a vote winner, particularly for more right win parties. So they will often try and convince people that it would be much better if people were in prison longer.

Doesn’t everyone agree on this though? Except for criminals maybe. I’m not particularly right wing, but I agree..

[quote FarTooSkinny]@Watermelon999

Is it the media then with its own agenda?

You have answered your own question there. The media very much has an agenda in this space - making noise about judges being soft on criminals sells newspapers. Politicians also like to grandstand on the issue of sentencing.

Things like knife crime often being manslaughter when they have chosen to carry a knife in the first place.

Do you have examples of this?[/quote]
@FarTooSkinny

The example I was thinking of was yousef macckie (? Spelling), but it appears his killer got off completely on murder and manslaughter. I wrongly thought he was convicted of manslaughter.

@Chanjer
“I think if you knowingly engage in a violent action that's likely to result in death then it should be murder and not manslaughter

He's a policeman, trained in restraint technique and fully knowledgeable that excessive pressure to the neck can very easily result in death. Having prior knowledge of such techniques should be an aggravating factor in deciding your charge

There's a school of thought that says you can actually die or have permanent injury caused in hardly any time, which is one of the reasons that erotic asphyxia is so dangerous. Apparently related to the combination of arteries being compressed“

Completely agree