Murder Comparison

Paper Summary:

In this article, the writer explains that the idea of purposeful murder is one that has been in the statutes of various states for some time. The writer notes that generally, crimes that are planned, or premeditated, are seen as being much more significant and worthy of much more prison time or harsher penalties than crimes that are not planned and just 'happen' because of the provocation that an individual faces from someone else, such as in a fight. The writer discusses two different cases and then notes that it is clear that there are many differences in the issues that relate to culpability, conduct and causation, which is why the verdicts ended up much different for the two individuals involved. The writer points out that this makes a strong difference in the severity of the penalties that the individuals received and the way that the court determined what these individuals were actually guilty of where each case was concerned.

Outline:
Purposeful Murder
Reckless Manslaughter
Conclusion

From the Paper:

"In the case discussed where reckless manslaughter is concerned, the individual in question had two altercations with a bouncer in a bar, and then later shot another man, who he then claimed he thought was the bouncer from the bar. The original jury did not agree with this, but the other court reversed that verdict and determined that the individual was indeed guilty of reckless manslaughter and not purposeful murder. There were specific reasons why the new assessment of the case determined that the man was guilty 'only' of reckless manslaughter as opposed to purposeful murder. These include the culpability, causation, and conduct elements that are seen in a manslaughter conviction."
"Where culpability is concerned, it is clear that the convicted man was the one that killed the other man, who he states he believed to be the bouncer from the bar. However, the man was also quite drunk at the time, and therefore his judgment of who was who, as well as his judgment of how upset he should be for being denied entrance to the bar, was likely impaired."

Sample of Sources Used:

• 2C: 11-3. Subtitle 2. Definition of specific offenses. Part 1. Offenses involving danger to the person. Chapter 11. Criminal homicide.
• 2C: 11-4. Subtitle 2. Definition of specific offenses. Part 1. Offenses involving danger to the person. Chapter 11. Criminal homicide.
• State of NJ vs. List, 270 N.J. Super 169.
• State of NJ v. Mauricio, 117 N.J. 402.

More papers on Murder Comparison:

• Comparison Essay # 86835 : "Murder: Comparison of Two Micro-level Theories"
• Term Paper # 66955 : "Mercy Killing or Murder?"
• Comparison Essay # 29220 : "Murder in the Ancient Near East"

APA Citation:

MLA Citation: