On 12 Jul, 23:54, John Wright
pegasus.f2s.com> wrote:> Doug wrote:
>> On 10 Jul, 08:24, JNugent
NPPTG.com> wrote:>>> Doug wrote:
>>>> On 9 Jul, 21:57, "DavidR"
4bidden.org.uk> wrote:>>>>> "David Hansen"
spidacom.co.uk> wrote>>>>>> As one might expect with the Daily Wail, the headline bears little
>>>>>> relationship to the contents of the story
>>>>> In the Telegraph there was another story on the same page about a person
>>>>> deliberately droving a LandRover at someone. The victim leapt of the way
>>>>> but the driver was charged with assault. My thought was "why wasn't it
>>>>> attempted murder?"
>>>> Good point. Why aren't cars treated like any other lethal weapon?
>>> Good point. Perhaps motor cars should be taxed and regulated like those
>>> lethal weapons kitchen knives (even daggers), hammers and plastic bags.
>>> Not to mention sleeping pills.
>
>> Any of which would involve a manslaughter charge if they inadvertently
>> caused a death but why not a car? If a car is deliberately used to
>> kill then that is treated as murder, just like any other weapon, but
>> not if it is an involuntary cause. Obviously killer drivers are
>> treated preferentially.
>
> You posted something in another thread showing how a driver of a van had
> been charged with murder. So its no so impossible as you like to portray.
>
I don't say it is impossible. What is it about 'If a car is
deliberately used to kill..." you do not understand?
Either there is something we are not being told about the van driver,
i.e. it was a deliberate killing which usually involves a murder
charge regardless of the weapon used, or the police are up to their
usual tricks of using any old initial charge, which will be changed
later when and if it comes to trial.
