Murder

  

 My uncle was charged with murder. We know that there are cases where the jury finds a person not guilty of murder but guilty of manslaughter. How can this be done?

The first thing to know is that the police have to convince the jury – in any police matter – ‘beyond reasonable doubt.’ Unless the accused pleads guilty, the police usually have to have witnesses to support the evidence that the accused had the intention and the awareness to kill. In all circumstances, defences would have to be either there was no intention and/or there was no awareness. If the jury accept the evidence that the accused did not have the intention to murder, they may find him guilty of manslaughter – and sometimes find him not guilty at all. A case in point is when I handled the murder of someone who was provoked. When there is intense provocation it is possible that the accused may lose control of his mind, even temporarily, and commit murder. I used the defence of ‘dissociative reaction to provocation’. My expert witness, a psychiatrist, defended under cross-examination that it is possible that under the extreme provocation the accused would not have the necessary awareness and intention to fully understand and know what he was doing. My client was found not guilty of murder but guilty of manslaughter. My client did three years instead of some twenty five years in jail.

Medical assault

SEXUAL CLAIM AGAINT (MEDICAL) DOCTOR: My younger brother who is nine years old told me that he had to go to the doctor, only a few blocks from where we live, for some tests. The doctor told my brother to undo his pants and the doctor put his hand on my brother’s private parts and told him to cough. But the doctor kept his hand on my brother’s genitals for too long and he even start to message his private parts gently. Can doctors do that?

Of course doctors can’t do that. There is a tendency by the occasional professional  to psychologically dominate and bully young boys – and those in a much weaker position by their sheer high status of being a doctor. If you have a good talk to your brother to ascertain specifically what the facts are and you agree that the doctor went too far, you can proceed with the matter. See a lawyer to formalize your complaint. There is an exception in law about the ‘presumption of the innocence’ until proven guilty. In this matter, in any civil hearing or Medical Tribunal, your brother could claim through his solicitor that there is in law ‘undue influence. There would be a reversal of the onus of proof, i.e.  the doctor (or anyone in authority – teacher, parents, lawyers, priests)  who would have to prove that he/she is innocent of the complaint. The issue of undue influence applies to all professionals and others where one party is in a clearly dominating position.