Drug Dealers

Sully

Hey...

Curious on this. If someone comes to my house and supplies me with drugs. If I take these drugs and die as a result. Can the dealer be convicted of manslaughter/murder or just drug posesion?

I assume the later, since it was my choice to take it? But then I ask myself.. would the dealer not have contributed to my death, so therefore, be convicted?

Comments?

Feelgood

Sully wrote: »

Hey...

Curious on this. If someone comes to my house and supplies me with drugs. If I take these drugs and die as a result. Can the dealer be convicted of manslaughter/murder or just drug posesion?

I assume the later, since it was my choice to take it? But then I ask myself.. would the dealer not have contributed to my death, so therefore, be convicted?

Comments?

Doubt it, If I sell you a car and you speed / crash and die, I cant be held responsible?. It was your choice to drive the car irresponsibly and it would also be your choice to take the drugs that killed you.

You could also maybe describe it as say a guy sells you a gun and you shoot yourself?. Do you convict the guy that sells you the bullets or the gun?.

Keith186

What a strange thing to be curious about.

What are you planning eh?
Take yourself and the dealer you hate down or something? The equivalent of a suicide mini bomb!:D

On more serious note there's no way it can be murder unless it was intentional/pre meditated.

Sully

Thought so. Silly me. lol

And no, its just something thats cropped up closer to home that got me thinking.

Stupid Quesiton. Moving swiftly on..

homah_7ft

Feelgood wrote: »

Doubt it, If I sell you a car and you speed / crash and die, I cant be held responsible?. It was your choice to drive the car irresponsibly and it would also be your choice to take the drugs that killed you.

You could also maybe describe it as say a guy sells you a gun and you shoot yourself?. Do you convict the guy that sells you the bullets or the gun?.

You could be held responsible if the car was defective surely. I have never heard of either case being brought but I would assume it's theoretically in the law. Feel free to correct me.

Feelgood

Theres no such thing as a stupid question....

Feelgood

homah_7ft wrote: »

You could be held responsible if the car was defective surely. I have never heard of either case being brought but I would assume it's theoretically in the law. Feel free to correct me.

But what if I didn't know the car was defective when I sold it?. How could you prove that I did know it was defective?.

Keith186

Oh that story. Well it could be argued that drugs kill people and that they know this when they are buying them so therefore supposedly know the risk they are taking.

Tobacco company called their smokes DEATH before in USA and customer tried to sue them for ill health and they argued that they were selling death.

Not the same but could vaguely be taken along the same lines but I'd imagine the authorites will try make an example of this person with the only effect being that others may not sell dodgy coke, desired effect would be for no one else to sell anything but that wont happen.

I Shot J.R.

Doubt a conviction would happen, could possibly be involuntary manslaughter but it would open up a Pandoras Box of lawsuits with people going after publicans/barstaff/offys etc because a drunk driver they served hit them. Then civil cases as it's an offence to serve a drunk person followed by slander cases because said person claimed to not be drunk. It'd be open season for them no win no fee companies. By no means along the same direct lines but same kind of logic if you get my jist.
I see your point Sully referring to earlier posts today but I reckon that he'll be done for possession/supply et al and probably do a bit of a stretch considering the outcome. Bit of a stretch as in maybe 5 years and serve 3.

AngryHippie

If you sold someone an ounce of coke cut with strichnene or some other toxic chemical, in the full knowledge of what it was, in full knowledge of what they intended to do with it, then technically you could end up with manslaughter, (maybe If your solicitor was the buyer most could get you off with the substance charge)
I can see where you are comin from in light of the last few weeks though, If it was cut with something lethal, The fcukers that cut it should be nailed. no question. Its not on, too many people are playing around with it for that kind of messin

kopparberg

the drug charge carries a maximum of life in prison so the judge would have to take the death into consideration when pssing sentence. so it could be the same outcome

homah_7ft

I presume the closest match would be gross negligence manslaughter. Is that correct? I imagine the problem would be in establishing a duty of care.

ninty9er

What we'd like to see happen and what actually will are 2 different things, but when these scum are mentioned I don't think the legal system is the first thing that comes to mind:mad:

Feelgood

ninty9er wrote: »

What we'd like to see happen and what actually will are 2 different things, but when these scum are mentioned I don't think the legal system is the first thing that comes to mind:mad:

It might be also worth noting that we can't tar everyone with the same brush. I understand the current situation you are talking about and its quite sensitive and installs anger in us all, but there are some dealers out there that just do it to fed their own habit and there are also people who deal as they have no choice (death threats) etc.

ninty9er

Feelgood wrote: »

It might be also worth noting that we can't tar everyone with the same brush. I understand the current situation you are talking about and its quite sensitive and installs anger in us all, but there are some dealers out there that just do it to fed their own habit and there are also people who deal as they have no choice (death threats) etc.

and that makes it different how?? how are we to know that recent events aren't in this vain?? what's the difference...IMO if you're dealing coke, you're dealing coke or you're dealing coke it's all the one...same as arguing it was only 1 pint Garda after you hit and kill a pedestrian!!

Feelgood

ninty9er wrote: »

and that makes it different how?? how are we to know that recent events aren't in this vain?? what's the difference...IMO if you're dealing coke, you're dealing coke or you're dealing coke it's all the one...same as arguing it was only 1 pint Garda after you hit and kill a pedestrian!!

Not really ninty9er....

Put it this way, when you are under the influence of drugs your not in the correct frame of mind....even if you just take drugs on a Saturday night it alters the way you think, your moods, your state of mind for the rest of the week. When you feel the buzz, you want more, you want that same feeling every Saturday night and you will do anything to get that.

When these young dealers deal drugs they think, great if I sell 20 Pills I have 5 for myself for the weekend. It doesn't cross their mind that those 20 pills they sold might kill someone, all they are concerned about is their own addiction because the drugs have altered their correct way of thinking.

Obviously this can't be said about every dealer, but I am just saying that dealers aren't always evil. They have drug problems. The street dealers are micky mouse guys just looking to fed their own habits, the guys we need to hunt down are the guys that are giving it to them, the big league guys that don't even take drugs. They just are after the money.

I think it should be highlighted that a lot of dealers are just regular guys with drugs problems looking to feed their own habit.

ninty9er

but would that not lead to an equal argument that the penalty for drink driving should be lesser for a clinically diagnosed alcoholic??

I know there are those out there that deal to feed their habit, but if they didn't that'd be many more people who don't turn into them....the consequences of this person's dealing are liable to be just as horriffic as those emerging from some millionaire kingpin dealer.

We penalise based on action and consequence, but maybe it's time we got tough and started to penalise potential consequences.

Feelgood

ninty9er wrote: »

but would that not lead to an equal argument that the penalty for drink driving should be lesser for a clinically diagnosed alcoholic??

I know there are those out there that deal to feed their habit, but if they didn't that'd be many more people who don't turn into them....the consequences of this person's dealing are liable to be just as horriffic as those emerging from some millionaire kingpin dealer.

We penalise based on action and consequence, but maybe it's time we got tough and started to penalise potential consequences.

I don't think you can even compare drink driving with drug dealing. Two very different arenas in my opinion.

I notice that you use the word penalise twice there, put it this way if your son, daughter, niece or nephew came to you and said look I'm addicted to drugs and I've been selling drugs to fed my habit, would you be marching them down to the cop shop to get them thrown into jail for a couple of years or would you realize that yeah they have a problem and need help and try to get them that help?. Would you think it right to penalise them?.

Again I'm just trying to highlight that while drug dealing is definitely wrong, I think that we also need to realise that certain drug dealers (not all) are merely doing it due to fed addiction problems and in my experience there is always some underlying reason for starting drugs, a death or loss, abuse etc etc.

Instead of tarnishing them all as evil, maybe see them as human beings that need help?. Maybe push more drugs awareness efforts in our communities?.

Its also worth noting that the biggest drug dealers are shops that sell nicotine products which is more addictive than heroin and kills more people a year that any other drug...but I never see anyone talking about penalizing shop keepers or throwing them in jail?....

rubadub

Feelgood wrote: »

Its also worth noting that the biggest drug dealers are shops that sell nicotine products which is more addictive than heroin and kills more people a year that any other drug...but I never see anyone talking about penalizing shop keepers or throwing them in jail?....

Yes, and publicans are drug dealers too, and in fact I think there have been cases where people did injure themselves while drunk and attempted to sue the barmen who knowingly served them while drunk. Definitely is an issue in the US.

I thought they did try and charge some dealers in the UK with manslaughter charges after people died from normal doses of uncontaminated ecstacy, when really it was the nightclub allowing too much water to be supplied who technically could be seen as the "killers". i.e. they died from too much water, not mdma.

dermot_sheehan

It's called unlawful and dangerous act manslaughter.


You engage in an unlawful and dangerous act that results in the death of a person, you can be charge with manslaughter.

Most U.S. states have a similar offence called felony murder, engage in any felony (serious criminal offence), that results in the death of a person, and you could be cahrge with murder over there.

johnnyskeleton

kopparberg wrote: »

the drug charge carries a maximum of life in prison so the judge would have to take the death into consideration when pssing sentence. so it could be the same outcome

The death of the person should not be taken into account when sentencing for drug possession, because:

1) it's not part of the offence of possession
2) you are being charged with the possession of drugs, not the sale of drugs.

The courts often take into account that drugs generally cause death and other social ills.

I suppose the gardai could try a manslaughter/poisoning/endangerment prosecution in circumstances where they didn't catch the dealer in possession of drugs.

CantGetNoSleep

Not a stupid question at all Sully, read this if you're interested

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/1998/2545.html

This is in England but the same should apply here

ninty9er

Feelgood wrote: »

I notice that you use the word penalise twice there, put it this way if your son, daughter, niece or nephew came to you and said look I'm addicted to drugs and I've been selling drugs to fed my habit, would you be marching them down to the cop shop to get them thrown into jail for a couple of years or would you realize that yeah they have a problem and need help and try to get them that help?. Would you think it right to penalise them?.

Penalise is the word I used. And yes it is the word I intended to use. I would have no qualms about putting one of my family behind bars for their own and society's safety.

The main problem I have with that is that the prisons are punishment based with rehab thrown in rather than rehab based with withdrawal of human rights of freedom.

Our prisons are like holiday camps....tvs in cells, playstations, sattelite connections, dinner menus!! It's ridiculous....no wonder people re-offend. They're getting no or bad rehabilitation and they're safer and more comfortable in prison than at home!!

johnnyskeleton

ninty9er wrote: »

Our prisons are like holiday camps....tvs in cells, playstations, sattelite connections, dinner menus!! It's ridiculous....no wonder people re-offend. They're getting no or bad rehabilitation and they're safer and more comfortable in prison than at home!!

Why not take a tour of Mountjoy. It's free, and you'd learn a lot more than you do in the tabloids. If you ask John Lonergan I'm sure he'll lock you up in a cell with your chamberpot and a junkie cellmate and see how you like it.

I do agree that there should be more rehabilitation in prisons, but it's difficult when there are probably more drugs per person in some of our jails than there are outside.

bigbobbya

Mountjoy is indeed a kip of primeval proportions and the Irish Prison Service is chronically under-resourced at present. The new prison at Thornton Hall needs to be built as quickly as possible.

All that being said however, some of the practices of the Prison Service are simply scandalous. The administration in Mountjoy are completely indifferent to the fact that heroin freely enters the prison, because it helps to keep the inmates in check. To my mind, many of those involved are pseudo-accomplices of the drug dealers.

CantGetNoSleep

bigbobbya wrote: »

Mountjoy is indeed a kip of primeval proportions and the Irish Prison Service is chronically under-resourced at present. The new prison at Thornton Hall needs to be built as quickly as possible.

All that being said however, some of the practices of the Prison Service are simply scandalous. The administration in Mountjoy are completely indifferent to the fact that heroin freely enters the prison, because it helps to keep the inmates in check. To my mind, many of those involved are pseudo-accomplices of the drug dealers.

I believe this also, makes there job a lot easier once prisoners have there drugs