Maybe read my post again carefully and then read the cases you link. Of coure intereference charges can be on any indictment. Those cases are both examples of what I am suggesting. The first involves the trial of a juvenile where there is no mandatory life sentence hence the interference charge can be relevant to sentence. The second is an example of a murder and interference conviction, but where the interference conviction has no effect on sentence due to concurrency. We have no process of joinder of the kind you suggest in Qld. Each charge must be separately identified on the indictment. The elements of a murder offence do not, and cannot include, any element of interference with a coprse. By its very nature such interference can only occur after the murder itself has been complete. That's a matter of law and logic I think. What you'd need to find, for it to be contrary to my view, would be a case where convictions for both murder and interference, on the same indictiment, for an adult, resulted in consecutive sentences.
Manslaughter is an alternative verdict to murder. But manslaughter also forms part of the elements of murder, which is why it appears as "unlawfuly killing" rather than as "manslaughter" on an indictment. Once the unlawful killing is established then a manslaughter conviction must follow, absent the success of any defences or excuses. The Crown may then attempt to prove other elements, on of which may be intention, to establish murder. If that element is not successfully proved then the jury can be instructed by the judge to convict on manslaughter, or be asked to consider manslaughter only in deliberation.
The inclusion of the interference charge here can have no effect on sentence if the accused is convicted of murder. But as I suggested, if there is a plea bargain and the Crown will accept a plea of guilty to manslaugher to the charge of murder which appears on the indictment then it may. But there are more strategic subtleties than that. Interference with a corpse will most usually be the burying, hiding or an attempt to destroy it. To have a significant effect on a manslaughter conviction, it would need to involve something less usual.
Thanks Hawkins,
Once again, i am sorry if it seems that i have been picking on your posts. I have responded to quite a few of yours lately, and not many others; this is simply due to the fact that your posts are neutral to the case, and therefore, i consider it safe to comment on them.
I certainly do not have the aim of finding caselaw / legislation etc. contrary to your view, i simply sought to reinforce my own current understanding on the matter, although, i must admit, it has been great to have these interactions with you, in the form of challenging your posts, as i am learning something new each time
eace:.
Anyway, as to the cases i mentioned, the 1st one, you are correct - a juvie- I missed that. The 2nd one, yes, i can see that what you say is correct; but i was responding to a post in which you had said that you are unaware of a murder charge which also carries a charge for interfering, so that was my relevance there. Another relevant case is the Daniel Morcombe accused. However, looking at your first post, you did say:
If there was also a conviction for interference it would not affect the sentence in any way. Although there is provision for the court to order that sentences be served consecutively, this matter doesn't fit within any of the existing common law guidelines which enliven the exercise of that discretion.
which suggests that you are aware that there are provisions for this. However, my challenge to you was with your more recent post, which said:
The charge of interference does come up now and then for adult accused but in conjunction with a manslaughter charge, not murder. If there has been interference and there is a conviction for that, then that can significantly increase the gravity of the manslaughter charge, rather then result in an additional penalty.
BBM
So, on the whole, i was attempting to convey the fact that, yes, the murder charge
may still stick, as it has in previous cases, regardless of the fact that interference has no effect on sentence.
Judging by what you have said, the chances of this are not as strong as what we are led to believe via MSM, and that the charge may be mitigated to manslaughter (with increased gravity). But this is not a guarantee. We will have to wait and see.
Regarding the process of joinder, i will have to get back to you on that. I am sure i have read of it in QLD legislation somewhere... maybe not for indictable offences though?!?!?!
As for the rest, you are saying that a manslaughter charge can be increased to a murder charge, via manslaughter? I was actually aware that unlawful homicide refers to both murder and manslaughter, and so now i have completely confused myself
:waitasec:. I will have to go and review some legislation i think.
Anyway, cheers Hawkins. I look forward to your reply