MovieChat Forums > Let Him Have It Discussion > Why exactly did the UK think this was a ...

Why exactly did the UK think this was a miscarriage of justice?

posted 16 years ago by TheGodfather1215
24 replies | jump to latest

I just saw this movie on IFC. So two people attempt an armed burglary. A police officer is killed. Obviously both parties are going to be equally responsible for the crime. Here in America it’s called felony-murder. If someone is killed during the act of a felony, even if its accidental, its first-degree murder and all parties involved in the crime are equally guilty. Even if someone is just sitting in a car as the getaway driver. A recent example was the NFL player Sean Taylor’s murder. Where 6 teenagers were robbing his house, Taylor interrupted them; one of them shot and killed him. But they were all arrested for murder. What is the issue in this case that makes it different? Why did this case become such an outcry? I dont get it.

If there was any injustice here, it was that the person who actually killed the cop only got 10 years.

[–] lilmikey03 16 years ago

A quick search of Google gives quite a few results, some that go in depth on the case. That should give you an idea of why it's nothing like Sean Tayor's murder: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=derek+bentley&btnG=Google+Search

I've frequently not been on boats.

[–] TheGodfather1215 16 years ago

Ive read about the case. I wouldnt have posted if I didnt. If these two didnt try to commit a robbery the police officer wouldnt have been killed. Period. They are equally responsible for his death.

[–] lilmikey03 16 years ago

Have you honestly read ANYTHING about Derek Bentley's case in detail? Because I really can't believe you have, not if you see absolutely nothing wrong with his being executed.

I've frequently not been on boats.

[–] TheLadyT 16 years ago

you clearly havn't read much about it. The boy was mentally dis-abled. At i think the point that he was innocent as this was a mis-carraige of justice has been proven as his name has now been cleared.

*´¨)
¸.·´¸.·*´¨) ¸.·*¨)
(¸.·´ (¸.·´ Magic Happens

[–] TheGodfather1215 16 years ago

At i think the point that he was innocent as this was a mis-carraige of justice has been proven as his name has now been cleared.
--------------

Is that English? Mental disability or not, as long as he could distinguish between right and wrong, he should be treated the same way under the law. Like I said, the only miscarriage of justice here was the fact that the person who actually murdered the police officer only served 10 years in jail. He should still be in prison.

[–] lilmikey03 16 years ago

An eleven-year-old would not be hanged for what Derek Bentley did. Derek Bentley had the mental capacity of an eleven-year-old, which is why he should never have been tried as an adult.

Is that clear enough for you?

I've frequently not been on boats.

[–] nevergreen 16 years ago

Good point Godfather, but the 'miscarriage of justice' is the fact that the law like Dickens said is an ass. The legal system in the US whereby present parties are tried for a crime one of them commited is not justice.
It is a grey area i'll give u that, but to be tried for a crime someone u knew commited but which u had no part of e.g. u and a friend get in a fight/burgle a house etc. and your friend kills the victim how are u equally responsible? That is not fair and just.

[–] rmax304823 15 years ago

It wasn't a miscarriage of justice, unless you take into account the fact that Derek had already been apprehended and taken aside. In that case, he was no longer particeps criminis.

But -- put that aside. Assume that he was still actively participating in a criminal act, urging his friend to violence. It was not a miscarriage of justice in that case.

His conviction was then justified, although the sentence is arguable.

The mistake, so far as we can tell from the film, was not in the application of the law but in the law itself. Some laws, such as those that required segregation in the American South, are plainly unjust. The death penalty belongs in that category. All modern industrialized nations, as they've evolved, have eliminated it except the United States and Japan, which executes about half a dozen people a year.

[–] candlelight-1 14 years ago

There is a huge difference between robbery and murder. Did all those guys who broke into Sean Taylor's house know some or any of them were armed? Were they all in agreement to the use of arms in the event of being caught? The law by which everyone involved is guilty of the most major crime committed is flawed.

Mind you, the whole American justice system is riddled with flaws and it makes me laugh when an American tries to put it across as anything but. I suppose it is a marker of the difference between Americans and Brits that most of the British can see this and other cases like it as a tragedy you couldn't make up while most Americans are willing to accept the ridiculousness of their justice system without question because of the "our betters know best" mentality that is implanted into their heads from the moment they have comprehension of the most basic words.

[–] les-woodward 14 years ago

*beep*

[–] lornamd-1 16 years ago

The reasons it is considered a miscarriage of are:

Derek Bentley didn't shoot the policeman, Christopher Craig did
Derek Bentley and Christopher Craig both deny Bentley said "Let him have it"
Christopher Craig said that Derek Bentley had no influence on him shooting the policeman
Derek Bentley had the mental age of a child so he should only be held accountable for his actions to the degree a child would
Even the widow of the murder victim agreed it was a miscarriage of justice.

I don't know about the Sean Taylor case but the idea that a person with the mental age of a child who gets led astray by a bad crowd and agrees to do a robbery is equally responsible if the man he does the robbery with shoots a policeman does not sound like justice to me. If Derek Bentley would be given the death penalty in the US then I would say that says more about the justice system in the US than it says about Bentleys innocence.

[–] DrBaltar 16 years ago

Also ; Bentley was under arrest at the time the crime took place.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] marktayloruk 14 years ago

You must remember-Americans tend to extremes,hence their draconian sentences.

[–] captkirk_4 14 years ago

Generally what happens is the cops target the actual gunman and use the threat of joint responsibility to get the others to make a deal and testify against the killer. We are not watching actual survelience camera footage of the event. This is the interpretation of the filmakers, they filmed the movie as if the protagonist was a meek and harmless simpleton who politely told his friend to put down the gun. In real life who knows what happened? This assertion of "being mentally handicapped" also needs scrutiny. Most criminals have very low IQ's bordering on moron, and they also happen to be vicious impulsive thugs. A neer do well in LD class is not the same thing as someone with downs syndrome or autism.

[–] lornamd-1 13 years ago

What if Derek Bentley had the body as well as the mental age of an 11 year old and he had been hanged?; would people think he execution was fine then? And what if Christopher Craig hadn't killed somebody would it still be ok to execute Derek Bentley for agreeing to the robbery? If you take part in a robbery you are responsible for that but you are not responsible for the actions of others unless you take part or verbally encourage him which it is never proven that he did.

Its also worth noting that a lie detector test found that Christopher Craig was telling the truth when he said he never heard Bentley say "Let him have it". I know lie detector tests can be wrong but it casts even more doubt on Bentleys guilt.

[–] Myth-and-Mayhem 14 years ago

If this wasn't a 'miscarriage of justice' then why was Bently pardoned & his name cleared? Obviously the government felt it was an injustice otherwise the Court of Appeal wouldn't have quashed Bentley's conviction for murder. Right?

"...the young man would love it too, but he can't afford it."

[–] barbarossa4188 14 years ago

I agree with TheGodfather1215.

"Stalingrad. . . The fall of Stalingrad was the end of Europe. There's been a cataclysm."

[–] Elder_Yautija 12 years ago

Try to look at it this way: if you have a friend who's an idiot and a wannabe mobster but you consider him a friend nonetheless, and if you're not the smartest kid in your class, and you're lonely and insecure, and because of your stupidity and his carelessness you decide to both go and rob a store, and your friend is carrying a gun without you even knowing it, and he starts firing it at police officers, killing one and wounding another, and you just stand there not fully comprehending what's going on, not even doing anything stupid like resisting arrest, would you be an accomplice IN THE MURDER? In the B and E, yes, in the attempted armed robbery, yes, but in the murder???
The case that the English were trying to make was that the poor nitwit more than likely had no idea that the thing was going to end in bloodshed, and also that, due to his poor mental capabilities, he wasn't even fit to stand trial.
Now I know that in the USA it works differently, but I'd like to remind you that that's exactly the reason why lots of movies and documentaries with similar stories and messages have been and still are being released in the USA as well: because maybe death penalty isn't really something to go so lightly about and hand it over like it was a speeding ticket. The boy was executed two months after the crime had been committed and a mere few weeks after the final decision was made. Isn't that a bit harsh?

[–] smeth 11 years ago

In the Sean Taylor case, were all six teenagers executed?

[–] barbarossa4188 11 years ago

What miscarriage ? He was a criminal and sooner or later he would have murder someone anyway. Good riddance.

"Stalingrad. . . The fall of Stalingrad was the end of Europe. There's been a cataclysm."

[–] bigal_a 10 years ago

The fact was that the Home Secretary wanted someone to hang for this pour encourager les autres. As Craig was too young to hang, they nailed Bentley.

I don't think the defence lawyers really wanted the case, and they certainly didn't spend a lot of time exploring the idea that Bentley really meant, "Hand over the gun like the policeman says".

The film is correct that Bentley was in Officer Fairfax's custody at the time of the fatal shot and made no attempt to escape or join Craig. The "Let him have it, Chris," was apparently in response to Fairfax's demand that Craig hand over the gun, so that I think would have been a reasonable doubt at least, and it was the prosecution's lynchpin in the case that the older boy had influenced the younger one to kill.

Craig supposedly shouted out, "Come on, coppers, I'm only 16. Come on, you brave coppers, think of your wives."

This essentially means "I'm prepared to kill you, and I know I can't hang for it."

[–] HarveyManfredSinJohn 10 years ago

Unfortunately, it's difficult to argue with the OP because he's clearly of the opinion that 'joint enterprise', a much disputed legal premise in this country, is in anyway 'just' even where an individual charged as part of a group has no intent himself of committing the particular crime (i.e. murder) in question. It's particularly absurd in this instance because Craig would, more than likely, have committed the attempted burglary, that led to the murder, without Bentley's assistance (it's not as if Bentley was a vital component to the crime, and it seems extremely unfair that he should be held responsible, particularly as a borderline-mentally-retarded individual, for Craig's need to show-off and 'impress' Bentley).

[–] Pharaoh-in-de-Nile 8 years ago

@ barbarossa4188

The only one here who should be hanged is you, you Nazi *beep* I'm glad that your anus is still chafing over Stalingrad where your precious Nazi-undermen were soundly thrashed.