Murder is not limited to intentional killing

What this source establishes

A letter to the editor answering Nigel Hughes's intent argument directly, though without naming him: "The proposition that a charge of murder can only arise where it is proven that an accused person intended to kill or intended to inflict grievous bodily harm, knowing that death was the likely consequence is, at best, incomplete and, at worst, misleading." Argues for extreme-recklessness murder: "Where it can be established beyond a reasonable doubt that an individual acted with extreme recklessness or what is often described as a 'depraved indifference' or 'wanton disregard' for human life, the requisite mental.

Key claims

• A letter to the editor answering Nigel Hughes's intent argument directly, though without naming him: "The proposition that a charge of murder can only arise where it is proven that an accused person intended to kill or intended to inflict grievous bodily harm, knowing that death was the likely consequence is, at best, incomplete and, at worst, misleading."
• Argues for extreme-recklessness murder: "Where it can be established beyond a reasonable doubt that an individual acted with extreme recklessness or what is often described as a 'depraved indifference' or 'wanton disregard' for human life, the requisite mental element for murder may be satisfied."
• Concedes the standard is high: "However, in this instance the evidence must satisfy an exceptionally high threshold."
• "The law is concerned not only with what a person hopes will happen but also with what that person knowingly risks. A conscious decision to proceed in the face of an obvious probability of death may demonstrate such contempt for human life that the distinction between recklessness and intent becomes legally insignificant."
• "To insist that only a proven intention to kill can justify a murder charge ignores the fact that in the most egregious cases, extreme recklessness may itself supply the malice that the law requires."
• Closing pointed question on the chain of responsibility: "And as an aside, did one local commentator not characterise, in a cavalier fashion, the sinking of the M.V. Barima as a mass killing. If so, who is the first in the chain of culpability?"
• GENRE NOTE: this is a signed letter, not reporting. It supplies the corpus's only sustained legal argument FOR the availability of a murder charge on these facts.

This page is a research summary prepared for comment and review. It is not the article. Copyright in the original remains with Kaieteur News; the full text is held only in the private research corpus from which this archive was compiled. Follow the link above to read it at the source.