Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

pinko-perchik t1_j9s9ho6 wrote

“Going forward, we no longer will recognize that an oral discovery of infidelity satisfies the objective element of something that would provoke a reasonable person to kill his or her spouse.”

Oddly specific—does this ruling not apply if it’s in writing? What about if it’s a partner’s suspicion but it isn’t admitted to?

1

Hoosac_Love OP t1_j9sd6dv wrote

I would guess oral/verbal and written are the same and mean as opposed to suspected or suspicion.

This also does not mean that extreme emotional disturbance via adultry can't mean a reduced charge or verdict but that proof or suspicion of infidelity in and of itself can't prove extreme emotional disturbance.

Sort of like taking psyche meds is not proof of legal insanity in and of itself but that does mean insanity can't be proven.

2

giabollc t1_j9ojtvl wrote

Schrodingers fetus. If it’s wanted, it a human and it’s death is murder, if it’s unwanted then it’s nothing and can be disposed at will

0

ladybug1259 t1_j9ouixq wrote

If you actually read the decision, the girlfriend was less than a week from her due date with a viable fetus. Fetus would have been a living human within a few days and died solely because this guy stabbed the mother repeatedly in her vital organs and it was dependent on her blood supply. His argument was that because by luck he didn't actually stab the fetus directly it shouldn't be murder.

6

giabollc t1_j9pm8md wrote

I was talking in general. If she were 2 months pregnant it would still be considered murder.

1

ladybug1259 t1_j9pohqq wrote

No it wouldn't in Massachusetts. The line for wrongful death and murder of a fetus is based on viability of the fetus on the logic that it's not a meaningful distinction if someone's 8 1/2 months pregnant and killed in a way that the fetus is seriously injured and dies of injuries after birth or killed before birth. There's case law on this for wrongful death and vehicular homicide. Commonwealth v. Cass (1984) and Mone v. Greyhound Lines (1975).

3

LackingUtility t1_j9rv322 wrote

But your legal citations ruin his anti-choice argument! That’s nOt FaIr!

1

Hoosac_Love OP t1_j9oktks wrote

The rulling was about whether infidelity is grounds for a reduction in charge to manslaughter.

5

giabollc t1_j9onxlo wrote

I understand. Just odd that you can get a first degree murder charge for killing a fetus because sometimes it is a human and other times it isnt

0

Hoosac_Love OP t1_j9pm957 wrote

It doesn't make that a fetus is a life in one sense and not the other.

1

BovaDesnuts t1_j9ootnz wrote

The ruling impacts two murder charges that a logically consistent court would determine to be one.

0

Hoosac_Love OP t1_j9oozwy wrote

I did see anything there on abortion but true they charged for the fetus death.

1