Skip to content Skip to main navigation

News

Avani Terraces - Greenway
Life is looking up

It’s not murder, just getting a little stabby

By johnboy - 4 April 2011 54

The Canberra Times has a report on Rebecca Anne Massey’s trial getting under way for the murder of Elizabeth Booshand at Charnwood shops in July 2008.

Mr Pappas told the jury that the two women lived in a “twilight zone” of drugs and crime.

He said there was no issue that his client had stabbed Ms Booshand but argued that she had never intended to kill the other woman.

Mr Pappas said Ms Booshand was fully conscious after the stabbing but underwent emergency surgery on her chest after being admitted to Canberra Hospital.

About 10 minutes into the operation she was declared dead, he said.

“Whether the death was caused by the stabbing or by some medical misadventure is a matter for you to decide,” he told the jury.

A brave new assault on personal responsibility by Jack Pappas. It will be instructive to see what the jury makes of it.

What’s Your opinion?


Post a comment
Please login to post your comments, or connect with
54 Responses to
It’s not murder, just getting a little stabby
Not 6:05 pm 04 Apr 11

Mysteryman said :

Not said :

Should we let the courts decide guilt? Or should we perpetuate the mistrial on account of gossip rags? No wonder Judge only trials are popular.

Oh geez, here we go again. JB, did you know that Chief Justice Higgins was posting under the name “not”?

Well for someone so insistent on a clean judicial process, one would think you would want more Jury’s present at trial. A way of doing that might be to keep assumptions to one’s self. Though I have been in front of Higgins once, I am of no likeness I assure you.

Gerry-Built 5:53 pm 04 Apr 11

perhaps she mentioned “to the pain!” prior to the attack?

knuckles 5:32 pm 04 Apr 11

Ian said :

I want to hear the argument that says you can stab someone in the chest and not be intending to kill them.

Well apparently you can stab your mum 57 times and not really mean to kill her. Its just being a bit negligent.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/news/local/news/general/judge-rules-porritt-didnt-murder-mother/241945.aspx

Mysteryman 5:12 pm 04 Apr 11

Not said :

Should we let the courts decide guilt? Or should we perpetuate the mistrial on account of gossip rags? No wonder Judge only trials are popular.

Oh geez, here we go again. JB, did you know that Chief Justice Higgins was posting under the name “not”?

Mr Waffle 4:47 pm 04 Apr 11

““Whether the death was caused by the stabbing or by some medical misadventure is a matter for you to decide,” he told the jury.”

…maybe I’ve just watched too many episodes of Law & Order, but isn’t determining the cause of death the job of the people who do the autopsy, not the jury?!

Not 4:45 pm 04 Apr 11

Should we let the courts decide guilt? Or should we perpetuate the mistrial on account of gossip rags? No wonder Judge only trials are popular.

p1 4:35 pm 04 Apr 11

Ian said :

I want to hear the argument that says you can stab someone in the chest and not be intending to kill them.

Well, I guess it is akin to speeding, in a stolen car, running from the cops, through a red light, yet not intending to kill the people you hit.

knoobs 3:48 pm 04 Apr 11

To be honest, I only came here to say that the title of this post made me laugh out loud.

Ian 3:46 pm 04 Apr 11

I want to hear the argument that says you can stab someone in the chest and not be intending to kill them. Is Massey going to claim to be such a precise knifeswoman that she could aim to miss all the vital things that might kill someone if stabbed?

Mothy 3:33 pm 04 Apr 11

Wow. Quality defense – questions intent to kill AND cause of death.

How much would that give you the irrits – you get to know who killed your friend/partner/family member, but because the medical profession attempted to save their life rather than just let them bleed out and die, some lawyer can jump up and down about reasonable doubt on cause and effect and Blammo! You don’t get to see them convicted of murder.

It will be interesting to see how that shakes out.

Keijidosha 3:31 pm 04 Apr 11

johnboy said :

I think that could get me in a lot of trouble.

Not if you claim it was a medical misadventure.

astrojax 3:30 pm 04 Apr 11

The_Bulldog said :

As for stabbing people without intent to kill – what a cracker. On the basis of that logic, would it be possible to stab someone without intent to harm?

well, perhaps not ‘stab to harm’, but certainly its possible to stab ‘not to kill’ – i could stab you in the foot, for instance; i would contend that i was merely trying to put you in pain, not kill you. so not so far fetched and i’m sure the honourable pappas j. will prosecute this line with some alacrity and efficacy…

johnboy 3:17 pm 04 Apr 11

Diggety said :

The_Bulldog said :

Can we run odds on the likelihood of a conviction and/or leniency of any possible sentence?

As for stabbing people without intent to kill – what a cracker. On the basis of that logic, would it be possible to stab someone without intent to harm?

What irks me about this, and a raft of similar cases, is that people’s illegal and destructive life-styles become a core part of their defence in such cases. It seems we can’t successfully prosecute criminals for conducting a criminal act because of their habitual criminal tendencies. Is it just me who finds this a trifle unusual or did I miss something here?

+1. Bulldog, well said.

JB, can we get some betting ring for this conviction/sentence?

I think that could get me in a lot of trouble.

Diggety 3:15 pm 04 Apr 11

The_Bulldog said :

Can we run odds on the likelihood of a conviction and/or leniency of any possible sentence?

As for stabbing people without intent to kill – what a cracker. On the basis of that logic, would it be possible to stab someone without intent to harm?

What irks me about this, and a raft of similar cases, is that people’s illegal and destructive life-styles become a core part of their defence in such cases. It seems we can’t successfully prosecute criminals for conducting a criminal act because of their habitual criminal tendencies. Is it just me who finds this a trifle unusual or did I miss something here?

+1. Bulldog, well said.

JB, can we get some betting ring for this conviction/sentence?

The_Bulldog 3:01 pm 04 Apr 11

Can we run odds on the likelihood of a conviction and/or leniency of any possible sentence?

As for stabbing people without intent to kill – what a cracker. On the basis of that logic, would it be possible to stab someone without intent to harm?

What irks me about this, and a raft of similar cases, is that people’s illegal and destructive life-styles become a core part of their defence in such cases. It seems we can’t successfully prosecute criminals for conducting a criminal act because of their habitual criminal tendencies. Is it just me who finds this a trifle unusual or did I miss something here?

1 2 3 4

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2017 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
www.the-riotact.com | www.b2bmagazine.com.au | www.thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site