Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Book research...

  • 26-08-2009 2:30pm
    #1
    jamin'
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23 ✭


    Hi, I was just wondering any lawyers out there might be able to tell me if a person under the age of 18 killed around a dozen people (with intention, which I presume is 1st Degree murder?) and their lawyer used the argument that that person is a sociopath would they get off without jail time?or what would happen to them?(being underage and all) appreciate any info that would help. And don't worry I'm not thinking of committing murder just research for a story. :)


Comments

  • #2
    Robbo
    Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 10,598 Mod ✭✭✭✭Robbo


    We don't have the varying degrees of murder, that's an American device.

    The age of criminal responsibility for murder is 10 years of age, as per the Childrens Act (2001) as amended by S.129 of the Criminal Justice Act (2006).

    Were it raised as a defence that the child was suffering from some defect of the mind that made them incapable of knowing what they were doing, the consequences of their actions or both, insanity may be a valid defence.

    If this is successfully raised, they will be found "guilty but insane" and be whisked off to the Central Mental Hospital in Dundrum for quite some time.


  • #3
    Tom Young
    Legal Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 4,338 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tom Young


    Phew - I was about to write what you wrote in a much more long winded fashion!


  • #4
    Robbo
    Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 10,598 Mod ✭✭✭✭Robbo


    Tom Young wrote: »
    Phew - I was about to write what you wrote in a much more long winded fashion!
    Any chance you could grade my FE1 paper on October 7th :)


  • #5
    Tom Young
    Legal Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 4,338 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tom Young


    Sure and your number is ;)


  • #6
    McCrack
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,004 ✭✭✭McCrack


    Robbo youre pretty much spot on but just for your own info (difference between a mark or two in the exam) is since the enactment of the Criminal law (Insanity) Act 2006 the vertict is no longer 'guilty but insane' as under the very old Trial of Lunatics Act 1883 but rather 'Not guilty by reason of insanity':

    http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2006/en/act/pub/0011/index.html


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    Robbo
    Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 10,598 Mod ✭✭✭✭Robbo


    McCrack wrote: »
    Robbo youre pretty much spot on but just for your own info (difference between a mark or two in the exam) is since the enactment of the Criminal law (Insanity) Act 2006 the vertict is no longer 'guilty but insane' as under the very old Trial of Lunatics Act 1883 but rather 'Not guilty by reason of insanity':

    http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2006/en/act/pub/0011/index.html
    Much obliged. I have the new verdict in my notes but was getting confused.

    The wording of the older legislation on insanity is so much more refreshingly colourful...


Advertisement