Page #: 2/2 |
@vamp.boy | 25 April 19 | |
@ freshdeadlyroses - 25.04.19 - 12:30pm What did the parents want to do in that second case, let both twins die? I guess choosing is impossible, but I'm almost certain in that situation the surgeons choose the stronger twin. lol In a completely unrelated case from R V Blaue, a man stabbed a Jehovah's witness who later refused blood transfusion because it was against her religious belief and died from blood loss, the court held that the chain of causation was not broken based on the egg shell skull rule (which is essentially to take your victim as they are) and the defendant was convicted for murder, do you think the rule is fair? Essentially if someone gets stabbed and ends up in a hospital who later neglect them and refuse to give them any proper treatment, the court stated in R v Smith and Cheshire that so long as the wound remains the operating and substantial cause of death, no chain of causation is broken. Do you think the court's decision in both of these issues are fair? By the way causation is a matter falling under the actus rea of the crime (which is the act) It must be combined with the Mens rea (intention) to form a criminal conviction. There goes another rant. |
||