Unsettled Emotions
Just when I thought I knew the law to provocation as a defence.. this came about.
Read the Article
Sigh...
posted by Marquis_De_Sade at 15:32
Monday, October 31, 2005
Read the Article
Sigh...
About Me
- Name: Marquis_De_Sade
- Location: Singapore
The essential causal link of anyone around him that has yet to recognise their crisis with alcohol, nicotine and caffeine.
Previous Posts
- The 'Back Door' to appeal on Question of Facts
- ELECTIONS
- Burrrrpppppppp.................
- My daily fix of coarse thoughts
- AHHHHHHHHHHHH..........................
- IndoChine Wisma 01/10/2005
- My Lastest Inspiration
- She's Off Trekking in Malaysia..
- TIMES ONLINE 08/08/2005
- FROM TIMES ONLINE 19/07/2005
1 Comments:
i reached the same decision as the jury / trial judge. Clearly, religion and ethnicity (a.k.a background) are not factors for attribution as to the characteristics of the D, only age and sex. To me, this has to change eventually, as beliefs and skin color are primodial issues that run in the vein of a person's way-of-thinking, actions, even decisions.
If one can argue that gender (sexist) and age (ageist) are characteristics that the objective reasonable man has to adopt in order to access whether the circumstances were sufficient to lead D to lose self-control, then I believe that someone's race (something you've no choice in since birth) and religion (even as a choice, religion influences) should be counted.
Meh.
Post a Comment
<< Home