Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Death and the Law - Unit 20. Preview Homicide Homicide Suicide Suicide Euthanasia Euthanasia Abortion Abortion.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Death and the Law - Unit 20. Preview Homicide Homicide Suicide Suicide Euthanasia Euthanasia Abortion Abortion."— Presentation transcript:

1 Death and the Law - Unit 20

2 Preview Homicide Homicide Suicide Suicide Euthanasia Euthanasia Abortion Abortion

3 Homicide Unlawful killing of a human being Unlawful killing of a human being

4 Homicide 1) Murder 1) Murder 2) Manslaughter: a) voluntary; b) unvoluntary 2) Manslaughter: a) voluntary; b) unvoluntary 3) Statutory offences: a) causing the death by dangerous driving (Road Traffic Act 1988); b) Infanticide (Infanticide Act 1938) 3) Statutory offences: a) causing the death by dangerous driving (Road Traffic Act 1988); b) Infanticide (Infanticide Act 1938)

5 Murder Intention to kill or cause grievious bodily harm Intention to kill or cause grievious bodily harm

6 Voluntary manslaughter Mens rea for murder but has special defence: Mens rea for murder but has special defence: 1) diminished responsibility (abnormality of mind; intoxication) 1) diminished responsibility (abnormality of mind; intoxication) 2) provocation 2) provocation 3) suicide pact (Homicide Act 1957) 3) suicide pact (Homicide Act 1957)

7 Suicide The act of taking one’s own life voluntarily and intentionally The act of taking one’s own life voluntarily and intentionally Before 1961 – an attempt to kill oneself resulted in a charge of a criminal offence Before 1961 – an attempt to kill oneself resulted in a charge of a criminal offence Abolished by the Suicide Act of 1961 Abolished by the Suicide Act of 1961

8 Suicide pact ‘ A common agreement between two or more persons having for its object the death of all of them’ (s4(3) Homicide Act 1957) ‘ A common agreement between two or more persons having for its object the death of all of them’ (s4(3) Homicide Act 1957) The defendant’s act will only be counted as being in pursuance of a suicide pact if ‘it is done while he has the settled intention of dying in pursuance of the pact’ (s4(3) Homicide Act 1957) The defendant’s act will only be counted as being in pursuance of a suicide pact if ‘it is done while he has the settled intention of dying in pursuance of the pact’ (s4(3) Homicide Act 1957)

9 Suicide pact The burden of proving the defence is on the defendant but the defendant need only prove it on the balance of probabilities The burden of proving the defence is on the defendant but the defendant need only prove it on the balance of probabilities

10 Suicide pacts The Suicide Act 1961 abolished the crime of suicide and the crime of attempted suicide The Suicide Act 1961 abolished the crime of suicide and the crime of attempted suicide By the same Act, it is still an offence to aid, abet, counsel or procure suicide, and those who do so can be imprisoned for up to 14 years; confirmed by the House of Lords in The Queen on the application of Dianne Pretty v D.P.P. (2001) By the same Act, it is still an offence to aid, abet, counsel or procure suicide, and those who do so can be imprisoned for up to 14 years; confirmed by the House of Lords in The Queen on the application of Dianne Pretty v D.P.P. (2001)

11 Involuntary manslaughter 1) constructive 1) constructive 2) gross negligence 2) gross negligence 3) reckless 3) reckless

12 Constructive manslaughter The death must be caused by an unlawful act; a civil wrong is not enough The death must be caused by an unlawful act; a civil wrong is not enough Difficulties in deciding whether there is an unlawful act where the defendant prepares an injection of a drug but the victim then injects himself Difficulties in deciding whether there is an unlawful act where the defendant prepares an injection of a drug but the victim then injects himself

13 Constructive manslaughter The current law: The current law: Where the defendant supplies the drug but does nothing towards the administration of it, he has not caused the death (Dalby 1982) Where the defendant supplies the drug but does nothing towards the administration of it, he has not caused the death (Dalby 1982)

14 Constructive manslaughter Where the defendant assists in the injection in some way, he has participated in the unlawful act of administering a noxious substance and where this act causes the death he is guilty of manslaughter (Rogers 2003) Where the defendant assists in the injection in some way, he has participated in the unlawful act of administering a noxious substance and where this act causes the death he is guilty of manslaughter (Rogers 2003)

15 Constructive manslaughter Where the defendant prepares an injection, then hands the syringe to V who self-injects and dies as a result of the drug, D is guilty of manslaughter as he has committed the unlawful act of administering a noxious substance under s23 of the Offences against the Person Act 1861: both D and V are engaged in the ‘one activity’ of administering the drug (Kennedy 2005) Where the defendant prepares an injection, then hands the syringe to V who self-injects and dies as a result of the drug, D is guilty of manslaughter as he has committed the unlawful act of administering a noxious substance under s23 of the Offences against the Person Act 1861: both D and V are engaged in the ‘one activity’ of administering the drug (Kennedy 2005)

16 R v Kennedy 2007 The defendant prepared a syringe of heroin and presented it ready for use to the deceased, who, acting freely and voluntarily, used it to inject himself and died as a result. The defendant prepared a syringe of heroin and presented it ready for use to the deceased, who, acting freely and voluntarily, used it to inject himself and died as a result. The defendant appealed against his conviction of manslaughter The defendant appealed against his conviction of manslaughter

17 R v Kennedy 2007 Held: Defendant’s conviction quashed. The deceased’s act of self-injection, being informed and voluntary, broke the chain of causation Held: Defendant’s conviction quashed. The deceased’s act of self-injection, being informed and voluntary, broke the chain of causation The defendant’s act of supplying the loaded syringe, though no doubt unlawful, was not a dangerous act and thus could not be the basis for a constructive manslaughter conviction The defendant’s act of supplying the loaded syringe, though no doubt unlawful, was not a dangerous act and thus could not be the basis for a constructive manslaughter conviction

18 R v Kennedy 2007 The deceased’s act of self injection was not unlawful and the defendant being a party to that lawful act could not be the basis for a constructive manslaughter conviction The deceased’s act of self injection was not unlawful and the defendant being a party to that lawful act could not be the basis for a constructive manslaughter conviction

19 R v Kennedy 2007 Commentary: If D injects V with the heroin (even with V’s consent), that is an unlawful act (administering a noxious substance, contrary to the Offences Against the Person Act 1861, s 23) Commentary: If D injects V with the heroin (even with V’s consent), that is an unlawful act (administering a noxious substance, contrary to the Offences Against the Person Act 1861, s 23) It is also dangerous. If it causes V’s death, then D will be guilty of constructive manslaughter It is also dangerous. If it causes V’s death, then D will be guilty of constructive manslaughter

20 R v Kennedy 2007 If V injects himself, D will not be guilty of manslaughter though D could be liable for the lesser offence of supplying a controlled drug If V injects himself, D will not be guilty of manslaughter though D could be liable for the lesser offence of supplying a controlled drug

21 Offences against a foetus Killing a foetus is not murder or manslaughter, but there are other offences which may be charged: Killing a foetus is not murder or manslaughter, but there are other offences which may be charged: 1) child destruction 1) child destruction 2) abortion 2) abortion

22 Child destruction ‘Any person who, with intent to destroy the life of a child capable of being born alive, by any wilful act causes a child to die before it has an existence independent of its mother, shall be guilty of an offence’ (s1(1) Infant Life (Preservation) Act 1929) ‘Any person who, with intent to destroy the life of a child capable of being born alive, by any wilful act causes a child to die before it has an existence independent of its mother, shall be guilty of an offence’ (s1(1) Infant Life (Preservation) Act 1929)

23 Child destruction Where a woman is 28 weeks or more pregnant, this is prima facie proof that the child was capable of being born alive (s1(2) Infant Life (Preservation) Act 1929) Where a woman is 28 weeks or more pregnant, this is prima facie proof that the child was capable of being born alive (s1(2) Infant Life (Preservation) Act 1929) However, the prosecution can try to prove that the child was capable of being born alive even though the foetus was less than 28 weeks However, the prosecution can try to prove that the child was capable of being born alive even though the foetus was less than 28 weeks

24 Child destruction It is not an offence if the act is done with the ‘purpose of preserving the life of the mother’ (Bourne 1939) It is not an offence if the act is done with the ‘purpose of preserving the life of the mother’ (Bourne 1939) There is no offence if the pregnancy is terminated by a registered medical practitioner in accordance with the terms of the Abortion Act 1967 There is no offence if the pregnancy is terminated by a registered medical practitioner in accordance with the terms of the Abortion Act 1967

25 Abortion The termination of pregnancy before it is complete with the purpose of destroying the foetus The termination of pregnancy before it is complete with the purpose of destroying the foetus Before 1967 it was a criminal act to end, or to help to end a pregnancy Before 1967 it was a criminal act to end, or to help to end a pregnancy

26 Abortion Under s58 Offences against the Person Act 1861 it is an offence to try to procure a miscarriage. Under s58 Offences against the Person Act 1861 it is an offence to try to procure a miscarriage. The offence can be committed by the woman herself or by another by unlawully administering any poison or other noxious thing or unlawfully using an instrument or any other means The offence can be committed by the woman herself or by another by unlawully administering any poison or other noxious thing or unlawfully using an instrument or any other means

27 Abortion By s1(1) Abortion Act 1967, there is no offence if the pregnancy is terminated by a registered medical practitioner where two doctors are of the opinion that: By s1(1) Abortion Act 1967, there is no offence if the pregnancy is terminated by a registered medical practitioner where two doctors are of the opinion that: The pregnancy has not exceeded the 24th week and that the continuance of the pregnancy involves greater risk of injury to health of the woman or any existing children of her family than if the pregnancy was terminated; The pregnancy has not exceeded the 24th week and that the continuance of the pregnancy involves greater risk of injury to health of the woman or any existing children of her family than if the pregnancy was terminated;

28 Abortion At any time during the pregnancy if the termination is necessary to prevent grave permanent injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman At any time during the pregnancy if the termination is necessary to prevent grave permanent injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman

29 Abortion At any time during the pregnancy if the continuance of the pregnancy would involve greater risk to the life of the pregnant woman if the pregnancy was terminated At any time during the pregnancy if the continuance of the pregnancy would involve greater risk to the life of the pregnant woman if the pregnancy was terminated There is a substantial risk that if the child were born it would suffer from a serious physical or mental handicap There is a substantial risk that if the child were born it would suffer from a serious physical or mental handicap

30 Roe v Wade (1975) The historic Supreme Court decision overturning a Texas interpretation of abortion law and making abortion legal in the United States. The historic Supreme Court decision overturning a Texas interpretation of abortion law and making abortion legal in the United States. held that a woman, with her doctor, could choose abortion in earlier months of pregnancy without legal restriction, and with restrictions in later months, based on the right to privacy. held that a woman, with her doctor, could choose abortion in earlier months of pregnancy without legal restriction, and with restrictions in later months, based on the right to privacy.

31 Roe v. Wade The court held that states may prohibit abortion to protect the life of the foetus only in the third trimester The court held that states may prohibit abortion to protect the life of the foetus only in the third trimester Embraced by feminists and denounced by many Christians Embraced by feminists and denounced by many Christians

32 Abortion debate The sanctity of human life has to be morally weighed against the right of woman over her body The sanctity of human life has to be morally weighed against the right of woman over her body

33 Abortion in Europe Most European countries – legislation that permits abortion within specified periods under certain conditions Most European countries – legislation that permits abortion within specified periods under certain conditions

34 UK Abortion is lawful if certified by 2 medical practitioners that to continue the pregnancy would involve risk to the life, or injury to the pregnant woman or her existing children Abortion is lawful if certified by 2 medical practitioners that to continue the pregnancy would involve risk to the life, or injury to the pregnant woman or her existing children Also: if there is a substantial risk that if the child is born it would suffer serious physical or mental handicap Also: if there is a substantial risk that if the child is born it would suffer serious physical or mental handicap

35 UK It is a criminal offence to terminate a pregnancy when the child is capable of being born alive It is a criminal offence to terminate a pregnancy when the child is capable of being born alive

36 Abortion Act of 1967 A pregnancy may be terminated within the time limit of 24 weeks A pregnancy may be terminated within the time limit of 24 weeks The time limit does not apply where abortion is performed to save lives The time limit does not apply where abortion is performed to save lives

37 Abortion Act of 1967 An abortion must be performed by a registered medical practicioner in a hospital or a place officially approved for that purpose An abortion must be performed by a registered medical practicioner in a hospital or a place officially approved for that purpose The Act does not apply in Northern Ireland The Act does not apply in Northern Ireland

38 Moral issues If life is sacred, does a foetus count as a person capable of suffering harm? If life is sacred, does a foetus count as a person capable of suffering harm? If it does, how is ending its life to be distinguished from the humane killing of a living human? If it does, how is ending its life to be distinguished from the humane killing of a living human?

39 Moral issues Should the welfare of the unborn prevail over the distress suffered by a woman compelled to an unwanted pregnancy, or endure the anxiety, cost, and difficulty of bringing up a handicapped child? Should the welfare of the unborn prevail over the distress suffered by a woman compelled to an unwanted pregnancy, or endure the anxiety, cost, and difficulty of bringing up a handicapped child?

40 Euthanasia Literally: Good death (from the Greek words “eu” and “thanatos”) Literally: Good death (from the Greek words “eu” and “thanatos”) Also called ‘mercy killing’ Also called ‘mercy killing’ Intentional killing by act or omission of a dependant human being for his or her alleged benefit Intentional killing by act or omission of a dependant human being for his or her alleged benefit

41 Euthanasia The question of an individual’s right to die The question of an individual’s right to die

42 Euthanasia Active Active Passive Passive

43 Active euthanasia Ending of a person’s life by a positive act, e.g. a lethal injection Ending of a person’s life by a positive act, e.g. a lethal injection

44 Passive euthanasia Ending of life by an ommission to act, e.g. a withdrawal of treatment Ending of life by an ommission to act, e.g. a withdrawal of treatment Courts have not found it easy to determine the lawfulness of withdrawing life support from an incurably or terminally ill patient who is in a persistent vegetative state (PVS), unable to make an autonomous decision Courts have not found it easy to determine the lawfulness of withdrawing life support from an incurably or terminally ill patient who is in a persistent vegetative state (PVS), unable to make an autonomous decision

45 Euthanasia Voluntary: when the person who is killed has requested to be killed Voluntary: when the person who is killed has requested to be killed Non-voluntary: when the person who is killed made no request and gave no consent Non-voluntary: when the person who is killed made no request and gave no consent

46 Assisted suicide Assisted suicide: someone provides an individual with the information, guidance and means to take their life with the intention that they will be used for the purpose Assisted suicide: someone provides an individual with the information, guidance and means to take their life with the intention that they will be used for the purpose

47 Euthanasia and the law The Netherlands - the first country to allow so-called mercy killing The Netherlands - the first country to allow so-called mercy killing Public approval ratings of nearly 90% for legalisation of euthanasia Public approval ratings of nearly 90% for legalisation of euthanasia Doctors have the right to refuse and patients have the right to choose euthanasia Doctors have the right to refuse and patients have the right to choose euthanasia

48 Conditions Doctors must Doctors must A) be convinced that the patient’s request was voluntary, well-considered and lasting A) be convinced that the patient’s request was voluntary, well-considered and lasting B) be convinced that the patient’s suffering was unremitting and unbearable B) be convinced that the patient’s suffering was unremitting and unbearable C) have informed the patient of the situation and prospects C) have informed the patient of the situation and prospects

49 Conditions E). have reached the conclusion with the patient that there was no reasonable alternative E). have reached the conclusion with the patient that there was no reasonable alternative F). Have consulted at least one other physician F). Have consulted at least one other physician G). have carried out the procedure in a medically appropriate fashion G). have carried out the procedure in a medically appropriate fashion (Section 293(2) of the Dutch Criminal Code) (Section 293(2) of the Dutch Criminal Code)

50 Anthony Bland The case arose out of a crush that occurred at a football stadium in 1989 The case arose out of a crush that occurred at a football stadium in 1989 A. Bland sustained hypoxic brain damage which left him in a persistent vegetative state A. Bland sustained hypoxic brain damage which left him in a persistent vegetative state

51 Anthony Bland Though his brain stem continued to function, his cerebral cortex (the seat of consciousness, communicative activity, and voluntary movement) was destroyed through lack of oxygen, but he was not ‘legally dead’ Though his brain stem continued to function, his cerebral cortex (the seat of consciousness, communicative activity, and voluntary movement) was destroyed through lack of oxygen, but he was not ‘legally dead’ No prospect of improvement No prospect of improvement

52 Anthony Bland His doctors applied to the court for permission to withdraw his ventilation, antibiotics, artificial feeding and hydration regime, while continuing otherwise to treat him to allow him to die with dignity and minimal pain and suffering His doctors applied to the court for permission to withdraw his ventilation, antibiotics, artificial feeding and hydration regime, while continuing otherwise to treat him to allow him to die with dignity and minimal pain and suffering

53 Anthony Bland The Official Solicitor (who acts for those under disability) argued that this would constitute a breach of the doctor’s duty to his patient, and a criminal offence. The Official Solicitor (who acts for those under disability) argued that this would constitute a breach of the doctor’s duty to his patient, and a criminal offence.

54 Decision The House of Lords regarded the right to self-determination as more important than the right to life The House of Lords regarded the right to self-determination as more important than the right to life This is especially compelling where the patient has expressed his clear wish not to be given medical care This is especially compelling where the patient has expressed his clear wish not to be given medical care

55 Decision Though Law Lords agreed that Bland’s life should be allowed to end, there was no clear consensus on what the law was or should be Though Law Lords agreed that Bland’s life should be allowed to end, there was no clear consensus on what the law was or should be All recognized both the sanctity of life and the autonomy of the patient, but how were these values to be reconciled in the absence of an explicit expression of instructions for Bland? All recognized both the sanctity of life and the autonomy of the patient, but how were these values to be reconciled in the absence of an explicit expression of instructions for Bland?

56 Decision For Lord Goff, the answer lay in protecting the best interests of the patient. For Lord Goff, the answer lay in protecting the best interests of the patient. But what interests can an insensate patient have? But what interests can an insensate patient have? Lord Goff thought they consisted partly in the anguish and stress to others Lord Goff thought they consisted partly in the anguish and stress to others

57 Dissenting opinion (Lords Keith and Mustill) “It seems to me to be stretching the concept of personal rights beyond breaking point to say that Anthony Bland has an interest in ending these sources of others’ distress. Unlike the conscious patient he does not know what is happening to his body…The distressing truth which must not be shirked is that the proposed conduct is not in the best interests of Anthony Bland, for he has no best interests of any kind.” “It seems to me to be stretching the concept of personal rights beyond breaking point to say that Anthony Bland has an interest in ending these sources of others’ distress. Unlike the conscious patient he does not know what is happening to his body…The distressing truth which must not be shirked is that the proposed conduct is not in the best interests of Anthony Bland, for he has no best interests of any kind.”

58 Decision The House of Lords ruled that the withdrawal of Bland’s nutrition and hydration did not constitute a criminal offence because any hope of Bland recovering had been abandoned and though the termination of his life was not in his best interests, his best interests in being kept alive had also evaporated along with the justification for the non-consensual regime and the duty to maintain it The House of Lords ruled that the withdrawal of Bland’s nutrition and hydration did not constitute a criminal offence because any hope of Bland recovering had been abandoned and though the termination of his life was not in his best interests, his best interests in being kept alive had also evaporated along with the justification for the non-consensual regime and the duty to maintain it

59 NHS Trust A v M; NHS Trust B v H (2000) The President of the Family Division heard applications on behalf of two NHS trusts to be permitted to discontinue treatment in the cases of two patients who were in ‘persistent vegetative states’ The President of the Family Division heard applications on behalf of two NHS trusts to be permitted to discontinue treatment in the cases of two patients who were in ‘persistent vegetative states’

60 NHS Trust A v M; NHS Trust B v H (2000) Applications – not opposed by the patients’ relatives Applications – not opposed by the patients’ relatives The court decided it was not contrary to Article 2 to allow these patients to die The court decided it was not contrary to Article 2 to allow these patients to die

61 NHS Trust A v M; NHS Trust B v H (2000) Article 2 – did not cover ‘acts of omission’ when it was no longer in the patient’s best interests to receive treatment, and when it was shown that ‘they would die swiftly and painlessly if nutrition and hydration were withdrawn.’ Article 2 – did not cover ‘acts of omission’ when it was no longer in the patient’s best interests to receive treatment, and when it was shown that ‘they would die swiftly and painlessly if nutrition and hydration were withdrawn.’

62 Re B, 2002 An adult patient was paralysed from the neck down and kept alive by ventilator An adult patient was paralysed from the neck down and kept alive by ventilator She wished artificial ventilation to be removed even though she realised this would result in her death She wished artificial ventilation to be removed even though she realised this would result in her death Her doctors were not prepared to do this Her doctors were not prepared to do this

63 Re B, 2002 The judge held that the right of a competent patient to request the cessation of treatment had to prevail over the natural desire of the medical professions to keep her alive The judge held that the right of a competent patient to request the cessation of treatment had to prevail over the natural desire of the medical professions to keep her alive

64 Re B, 2002 If mental capacity were not in issue (the patient was of sound mind) and the patient, having been given the relevant information and offered the viable options, chose to refuse treatment, that decision had to be respected by the doctors If mental capacity were not in issue (the patient was of sound mind) and the patient, having been given the relevant information and offered the viable options, chose to refuse treatment, that decision had to be respected by the doctors

65 The right to die? In 2001, Dianne Pretty was suffereing from motor neurone disease, a progressive degenerative illness that was terminal In 2001, Dianne Pretty was suffereing from motor neurone disease, a progressive degenerative illness that was terminal

66 The right to die? She wished to control the time and manner of her dying, but her physical disabilities were such that they prevented her from taking her own life unaided She wished to control the time and manner of her dying, but her physical disabilities were such that they prevented her from taking her own life unaided

67 The right to die? She wished her husband to help her; he was willing to do this provided he was not prosecuted for the criminal offence of aiding another person to commit suicide She wished her husband to help her; he was willing to do this provided he was not prosecuted for the criminal offence of aiding another person to commit suicide Director of Public Prosecutions refused Director of Public Prosecutions refused

68 The right to die? Mrs Pretty took her case to court, seeking a judicial review of this decision, and claiming that she had a human right to commit suicide, with assistance Mrs Pretty took her case to court, seeking a judicial review of this decision, and claiming that she had a human right to commit suicide, with assistance

69 The right to die? The House of Lords expressed sympathy, but held that there was no human right to assisted suicide The House of Lords expressed sympathy, but held that there was no human right to assisted suicide Mrs Pretty took her case to the ECHR, Mrs Pretty took her case to the ECHR,

70 The right to die? The Court decided that Article 2 guaranteed the right to life, and could not ‘without a distortion of language, be interpreted as conferring the diametrically opposite right, namely a right to die’. The Court decided that Article 2 guaranteed the right to life, and could not ‘without a distortion of language, be interpreted as conferring the diametrically opposite right, namely a right to die’.

71 The Death Penalty In Great Britian, hanging was the preferred method of execution for hundreds of years In Great Britian, hanging was the preferred method of execution for hundreds of years Capital punishment for murder was suspended in 1965 and abolished in 1970 Capital punishment for murder was suspended in 1965 and abolished in 1970 Abolished for the remaining offences in 1998 Abolished for the remaining offences in 1998 Abolitionists and retentionists Abolitionists and retentionists

72 Ruth Ellis The last woman to be hanged in Great Britain The last woman to be hanged in Great Britain Ellis (28) shot her boyfriend David Blakely in 1955 Ellis (28) shot her boyfriend David Blakely in 1955

73 Ruth Ellis “battered woman syndrome” “battered woman syndrome” Ellis had a miscarriage 10 days before the killing because Blakely punched her Ellis had a miscarriage 10 days before the killing because Blakely punched her

74 The Ellis trial “It was obvious that when I shot him, I intended to kill him” “It was obvious that when I shot him, I intended to kill him” The jury reached the verdict in 14 minutes The jury reached the verdict in 14 minutes Ellis executed three weeks later Ellis executed three weeks later

75 Ellis Case Reopened The case reopened in 2003 – the relatives wanted to replace the decision with a verdict of manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility The case reopened in 2003 – the relatives wanted to replace the decision with a verdict of manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility “Substantial error” – the judge refused to allow the jury to consider the provocation defense “Substantial error” – the judge refused to allow the jury to consider the provocation defense New verdict refused New verdict refused

76 Legal terms Commit a crime Commit a crime = izvršiti kazneno djelo = izvršiti kazneno djelo Charge with a crime Charge with a crime = optužiti za kazneno djelo = optužiti za kazneno djelo Sentence Sentence =kaznena presuda =kaznena presuda Pass a sentence Pass a sentence = izreći presudu = izreći presudu

77 Legal terms Reprieve Reprieve If someone who has been sentenced in a court is reprieved, their punishment is officially postponed or cancelled; If someone who has been sentenced in a court is reprieved, their punishment is officially postponed or cancelled; odgoditi izvršenje kazne; osloboditi kazne, pomilovati odgoditi izvršenje kazne; osloboditi kazne, pomilovati

78 CONDITIONAL SENTENCES 1. Open condition 1. Open condition 2. Hypothetical condition 2. Hypothetical condition A) present A) present B) past B) past

79 Open and hypothetical conditions: meaning Open condition: leaves unresolved the question of the fulfillment or non- fulfillment of a condition, and hence also the truth of the proposition expressed by the main clause Open condition: leaves unresolved the question of the fulfillment or non- fulfillment of a condition, and hence also the truth of the proposition expressed by the main clause Hypothetical condition: conveys the expectation that the condition will not be fulfilled Hypothetical condition: conveys the expectation that the condition will not be fulfilled

80 OPEN CONDITION: FORM (If = ako) If clause: present simple Main clause: future (will/shall) If he is convicted, he will spend the rest of his life in prison.

81 If not = unless Unless he proves his innocence, he will spend the rest of his life in prison Unless he proves his innocence, he will spend the rest of his life in prison

82 Hypothetical condition: present (if = kad bi) If clause: simple past If clause: simple past Main clause: would/should + infinitive (present conditional) Main clause: would/should + infinitive (present conditional) If he changed his statement, the jury would not believe him. If he changed his statement, the jury would not believe him.

83 Hypothetical condition: past (if = da) If clause: past perfect If clause: past perfect Main clause: would have + past participle (past conditional) Main clause: would have + past participle (past conditional) If he had pleaded guilty, he would have been convicted. If he had pleaded guilty, he would have been convicted.

84 Three types of conditional sentences: examples 1. If he commits a crime, he will be punished. 1. If he commits a crime, he will be punished. 2. If he committed a crime, he would be punished. 2. If he committed a crime, he would be punished. 3. If he had committed a crime, he would have been punished. 3. If he had committed a crime, he would have been punished.


Download ppt "Death and the Law - Unit 20. Preview Homicide Homicide Suicide Suicide Euthanasia Euthanasia Abortion Abortion."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google