Matches in DBpedia 2016-04 for { <http://wikidata.dbpedia.org/resource/Q5309405> ?p ?o }
Showing triples 1 to 30 of
30
with 100 triples per page.
- Q5309405 subject Q6995856.
- Q5309405 subject Q8184919.
- Q5309405 subject Q8185006.
- Q5309405 subject Q8427928.
- Q5309405 subject Q8647619.
- Q5309405 abstract "REDIRECT Template:Infobox court caseDrury v. Her Majesty's Advocate is a Scottish criminal case heard before a full bench (five judges) of the High Court of Justiciary sitting as the Court of Criminal Appeal. Stuart Drury had been convicted of killing his former partner with a hammer on concluding that she had begun a new relationship with another man. The original trial judge directed the jury that a finding of culpable homicide could only be made where the accused had not intended to kill and had not displayed enough wicked recklessness to convict of murder, and that a defence of provocation was only possible if the violence was proportionate to the provocation itself.In the Court of Criminal Appeal's judgement, the Lord Justice General, Lord Rodger, sought to clarify what he considered to be an incomplete standard definition of murder:This was a controversial opinion, as it made murder a more difficult charge to prove. Normally, when prosecuting, the Crown seeks to establish the appropriate actus reus, mens rea, and lack of any defences; however, Drury suggests that the mens rea of murder is “wicked recklessness”, where wicked means there is no defence. This means that, if a defence exists, there is no mens rea. The effect of this is that, if the accused successfully pleads provocation or diminished responsibility, his conviction is reduced from murder to culpable homicide.This conflicts with the principle that a defence may be based on a mistaken belief by the accused (e.g. the belief he was being attacked), but that the belief must be reasonable (Owens v HMA). Drury cannot be reconciled with this idea because holding an unreasonable belief may be “reckless” but it is not “wicked”.".
- Q5309405 thumbnail Royal_Coat_of_Arms_of_the_United_Kingdom_(Scotland).svg?width=300.
- Q5309405 wikiPageWikiLink Q1048403.
- Q5309405 wikiPageWikiLink Q1057850.
- Q5309405 wikiPageWikiLink Q1240108.
- Q5309405 wikiPageWikiLink Q132821.
- Q5309405 wikiPageWikiLink Q16973098.
- Q5309405 wikiPageWikiLink Q1738844.
- Q5309405 wikiPageWikiLink Q2636819.
- Q5309405 wikiPageWikiLink Q3128540.
- Q5309405 wikiPageWikiLink Q3566104.
- Q5309405 wikiPageWikiLink Q4706986.
- Q5309405 wikiPageWikiLink Q5189419.
- Q5309405 wikiPageWikiLink Q5508022.
- Q5309405 wikiPageWikiLink Q600751.
- Q5309405 wikiPageWikiLink Q6679873.
- Q5309405 wikiPageWikiLink Q6995856.
- Q5309405 wikiPageWikiLink Q8016145.
- Q5309405 wikiPageWikiLink Q8184919.
- Q5309405 wikiPageWikiLink Q8185006.
- Q5309405 wikiPageWikiLink Q8427928.
- Q5309405 wikiPageWikiLink Q8647619.
- Q5309405 comment "REDIRECT Template:Infobox court caseDrury v. Her Majesty's Advocate is a Scottish criminal case heard before a full bench (five judges) of the High Court of Justiciary sitting as the Court of Criminal Appeal. Stuart Drury had been convicted of killing his former partner with a hammer on concluding that she had begun a new relationship with another man.".
- Q5309405 label "Drury v HM Advocate".
- Q5309405 depiction Royal_Coat_of_Arms_of_the_United_Kingdom_(Scotland).svg.