To think this is NOT a good example of why the law should change around assisted suicide

[LydiaBennetsUglyBonnet]

www.itv.com/news/granada/2022-07-21/pensioner-who-killed-wife-in-suicide-pact-calls-for-law-change?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR1ETDQNfb1DFNtznBTAi__qpBa-ivcvynJSwwAFXzaP3gFv6nRnyvsS_YU#Echobox=1658433729

A 71yo man slit the throat of his wife, who had cancer, and then tried (but failed) to kill himself. He claims this was a suicide pact.

he was found not guilty of murder but guilty of manslaughter earlier this week. He is now apparently campaigning for a change in the law around assisted suicide.

Now this case has utterly perplexed me. The UK definition of manslaughter is:

”a person is guilty of involuntary manslaughter when he or she intends an unlawful act that is likely to do harm to the person, and death results which was neither foreseen nor intended”

He did intend to kill so I’m not sure how that works out.

He’s getting loads of support on social media and some very supportive comments from the judge.

Personally I just don’t get it - ”assisted suicide” in such a violent and painful way, followed by the suicide of someone who is NOT terminally ill is not, IMO, a good example of why the law should change. I don’t necessarily disagree with the principles of assisted suicide, I think if we must have it it should be heavily regulated. This man says “nobody should have to go what we went through”. But he wasn’t ill, and it was such a horribly painful death for her. And being unable to live without your spouse, as he claims, can’t possibly be a good enough reason to have to legally commit suicide.

Am I the only one who thinks this is a horrific case and can’t understand why he’s getting so much support?!

I think the method matters a lot. I can't understand why he chose to commit such a violent act towards someone he loved.
If it was a suicide pact then surely you make certain that you have enough tablets and lie down together somewhere.

Isn't he a case for assisted suicide in that the absence of it makes people do horrific things like this? Clearly this isn't a great way to go about it, but equally people do ridiculous things.

I would assume they considered it difficutl to prove the mens rea element of murder, that he intended to do her harm. As his intention was, allegedly, to relieve her suffering.

He's talking shit if she had advanced cancer couldn't he have overdosed her on morphine? You have a cocktail of drugs at the end hypothetically you could stash some.

Or upped her dose of morphine then smothered her. Why would you slit someone's throat? I definitely think assisted dying should be legal we have the drugs available which cause painless death. Then he would be going to prison for slitting someone's throat..

Well it probably should change, so that she could have died in a painless way if she wanted to, and then no one could claim assisted suicide for a violent killing.

So he’s sort of right but also yanbu

It was violent but also a relatively quick and painless way to go. There’s a reason why it’s still allowed as an acceptably humane way of livestock slaughter (halal and kosher).

In comparison, using the type of tablets you have unlimited access to over the counter is actually a slow and painful death by a poisonous overdose.

So he might have chosen the method that would be easiest on her, even though it’s harder on him because it’s a lot easier to feed someone tablets than it is to wield a knife.

I don’t agree that choice of method is evidence of a suicide pact or evidence of no suicide pact. In the US most suicide pacts involve guns, they don’t here because of lack of easy access to a gun and ammo.

Drugs are tightly controlled , or should be. You cant just stash some if you are on a cocktail of drugs its because you need to take them.
I firmly believe that we should allow assisted dying, I have terminal cancer and I dread the end suffering, I dont have faith in being kept pain free having watched my OH go through this and having to wait hours between doses because they couldnt legally give him any more.
Id be off to Dignitas if I could physically get there.

She had cancer not dementia. Surely she could have written a note or left a voice memo saying goodbye to her family.

Yes the jury believed his story of either suicide pact or loss of control. But that only requires passing the "reasonable doubt" threshold.

I am sorry that you had this experience.

I suppose it comes down to what we have been through with loved ones. Both my parents had painless comfortable deaths.

And yes an assisted dying law would stop cases like this whether he's a compassionate and loving husband facing a terrible ordeal or a man who's got away with murder.

It would still leave similar cases where people kill spouses with dementia though.

Slitting someone's throat is not assisted suicide.

(Paramedic)

My thoughts.

She was 6 months in to a stage 4 lung cancer diagnosis, she will likely have had weeks maybe even days left, and would have been at an extremely distressing point in her disease. Also at that stage she could easily have got admitted to hospital/hospice yet they chose not to go down that route. This doesn't strike me as the actions of a frustrated uncaring abuser. Surely he would have bumped her off much early or pack her off to hospital or care home and not visited if he didn't care.

I have been to many suicides by many different methods, including suicide by hemorrhage, and whilst that method makes for an 'interesting' scene it really isn't as unpleasant a method as many others, including a lot of overdoses. The problem with overdoses, is whilst it might seem like a non violent method, unless you understand the pharmacology you can end up with a really unpleasant, drawn out end, or failure, far worse than a rapid death by haemorrhage.

His own failed suicide attempt, is strange, but maybe his wife was the 'brains' of the operation and encouraged him to feign suicide to provide a defence, or maybe in his grief this was just his way of reacting.

I do agree that manslaughter seems like the wrong charge. He intended his actions to kill her and he was, presumably, of sound (ish, the prolonged grief of a terminal illness would affect anybody) mind. So sounds like murder with mitigating circumstances under the current law.

The flip side is that a lot of abusive men use the same defence tactics, however probably not in a situation where their spouse had only days or weeks to live anyway.

Assisted dying in law would arguably prevent these violent assisted suicide incidences. The suicide stats for terminally ill is terrifying and it shouldn’t be that hard.

Manslaughter was the correct charge as the situation falls under #1.

”Manslaughter can be committed in one of three ways:

1. Killing with the intent for murder but where a partial defence applies, namely loss of control, diminished responsibility or killing pursuant to a suicide pact.
2. Conduct that was grossly negligent given the risk of death, and did kill ("gross negligence manslaughter"); and
3. Conduct taking the form of an unlawful act involving a danger of some harm that resulted in death ("unlawful and dangerous act manslaughter").

The term "involuntary manslaughter" is commonly used to describe manslaughter falling within (2) and (3) while (1) is referred to as "voluntary manslaughter".” www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/homicide-murder-and-manslaughter

thereisonlyoneofme

By that stage in her disease she would likely have had a very high morphine tolerance due to regular and prolonged and the amount she would have needed to take to reliably kill her would likely be more than the one bottle of oromorph they had in the house, and this assumes that at this stage with a large mass in her chest she would be capable of swallowing and keeping it down.

Death from cancer can often be a horrible horrible thing.

^^This. But why would he murder her at that point in her life? She was dying, all he had to do was wait. I would assume he did want to save her suffering, all the evidence points that way. And for those saying "why not tablets" that's not possible for everyone.

Assisted dying is legal for anyone in Britain who can afford the air fare to the Dignitas clinic in Zurich.
It is high time we made it available in the UK for everyone else, so we all have the choice to die painlessly and comfortably in our own homes at a time of our choosing.
Had it been available, this desperately sad event and trial would have been avoided.

Dignitas fee is quite expensive in addition to travel. You also have to be well enough to travel.

www.dignitas.ch/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=22&lang=en

I think your idea of 'relatively painless ' and mine are worlds apart.

I honestly can't see how having your throat cut can be described as in any way painless.

I get the point about pills not being readily available, or an easy way to die. I hadn't really looked into it, I just had a mental image of two people downing a bottle of gin and swallowing a load of pills.

Assisted dying is legal for anyone in Britain who can afford the air fare to the Dignitas clinic in Zurich.

and who is able to travel there unassisted.

I thought exactly the same!

DH and I have agreed to put aside some of our retirement lump sum as a Dignitas fund, so we'll have the option. I think every country should have it available for all, heavily regulated obviously. We put pets through less than we expect humans to go through.

You assume that at that stage in her disease, with a massive mass in her chest, that she could swallow and then that she could keep it down in a large enough quantity long enough to absorb.

The sad thing there though is that you might have to end your life earlier than you would have wished in order to be physically and mentally well enough to travel.