[Closed] Murder by gyrocopter

Tis a weird one. I just don't wee how it could be murder as you must have intent to kill and I just don't see how you could intend to kill someone with a gyrocopter. Intending to hit them or scare them with it and killing them as a result would be manslaughter. Not seen any more detail than in that report tho.

Feels to me like "its a hunt sab so sling the book at him"

I managed to kill several people the other night with a Police helicopter on GTA4. Its quite easy.

Justice by Gyrocopter?

Not sure what it is about gyrocopters that exludes them from a long list of potential weapons?

To be fair if newspaper speculation is anything to go by the head huntsman had complained to the police about the gyrocopter following and harassing them for the previous 2 weeks. I think the loopy liberals hunt sabatoeurs flying the thing should by locked up for life. Send out a stern message to them that there are better ways to get your message across than to threaten people's lives!

Feels to me like "its a hunt sab so sling the book at him

Oh ffs talk about jumping to conclusions!

Nick - get a grip - I said thats what it "feels like to me" and "not seen any detail" not that it is a case of that nor that I have any basis for the thought.

I will bet you tho that there is no conviction for murder as I just don't see how you could show intent to kill.

I have no idea whether they can make murder stick or whether it's even justified, why do you feel that they want to sling the book at him because he's a hunt sab?

i'm stil struggling trying to work out the core differences between a gyro and a heli.......

can anyone help, probably safer with pics, lol!

Heli rotors are powered, Gyro's aren't is essentially the difference

Oh, and using one to kill people of course

Oh, and using one to kill people of course

Nick - it would appear on the surface / superficially a rather steep charge and there is serious history of hunt sabs having the book throw at them while hunt followers dont. Establishment against crusties - the crusties get the shitty end of the stick

Crusty that can afford a gyrocopter? Not exactly dog on a string and a battered transit is it?

I nearly landed on one of them during a parachute jump at that very airfield. The **** came bimbling out of its enclosure onto the landing zone without even looking up to see a load of us in bright orange suits and chutes. I just happened to be the closest and had to make a evasive turn at less than 100m. Very scary!

Tandem the hunt sabs should just stay at home and keep out of others way. Who cares about their 'beliefs'. Why are they foisting them on others. They are the provocateurs. A$$hats all of them!

It has been reported that the gyrocopter was returning to the airfield to refuel.
Is it perhaps possible that the gentlemen that tragically lost his life in in the incident was aiming to confront the gyrocopter occupants?

I can only imagine that he has been stuck by the driven propellor...

Faux by faux - your belief not shared by the majority of the country.

Hunting is unnecessary and barbaric.

The unspeakable in pursuit of the inedible

Hunting animals with dogs etc has been banned, are you alleging that the hunt was breaking the law?

airfield is 12 mins ride from my house, might go for a shufty

serious history of hunt sabs having the book throw at them while hunt followers dont

That'll be because sabs are law breaking ****s looking for a fight who don't give a sh1t about animal welfare and hunt followers are not.

I read that one of the 2 gyrocopter occupants has been charged with murder...
The police / CPS must think they have some pretty compelling evidence or someone high-up is also a member of the same hunt.... (sorry for being cynical)

Nick - of course they were - hunts do continuously and anyway the law is s full of holes.

Needs a new law to tighten up the loopholes and the hunts need to stop being so hypocritical.

Hunting animals with dogs etc has been banned

No it hasn't - rats & rabbits can still be hunted

and cats 🙂

Since the fuzz/CPS dont f*** about throwing murder charges around for fun, I think's it's probably safe to assume that they have a good reason and sufficient evidence to make the charge especially so quickly after the incident.

Basically then, murder is when a person [u]causes the death of another person with an intention[/u] to kill them [u]or to cause grievous bodily harm[/u]*. This is the case unless the killing is justified, that is, through the withdrawal of treatment, when the defendant was acting in self-defence or trying to prevent a serious crime. If the homicide was committed through provocation towards the defendant or due to the defendant's diminished responsibility the defendant is not guilty of murder, but of voluntary manslaughter (Lacey and Wells, 1998).

Manslaughter covers all homicides which are not murder, but are still unlawful. The aspect which distinguishes murder and involuntary manslaughter is the intention of the defendant. This is where the defendant does not have the malice aforethought, but their state of mind is such that the law still deems them culpable. An involuntary manslaughter includes manslaughter by an unlawful or dangerous act (Smith and Hogan, 1992) and manslaughter due to recklessness or gross negligence. The defendant does not deliberately kill the victim, but due to their actions the victim dies. Where voluntary manslaughter is concerned however, the defendant may still have the malice aforethought of murder, but there are mitigating circumstances existing which reduce the crime to a lesser type of homicide

[url= http://web.ukonline.co.uk/ruth.buddell/chapter1.htm ]SOURCE[/url]

* my highlighting.

Now he knows how it might feel to be ripped apart by a pack of dogs!

how about if one of your family members is stabbed/shot I make a wisecrack about at least them now knowing what a bullock in an abbattoir feels like getting a bolt gun in the head or a machete across the neck?

number2, you sad, pathetic little man. Still, I suppose your name is accurate in one sense at least.

Pathetic.

Also, to whoever added that pathetic tab above, might you care to consider that it is showing support to accused murderers and remove it?

how about if one of your family members is stabbed/shot I make a wisecrack about at least them now knowing what a bullock in an abbattoir feels like getting a bolt gun in the head or a machete across the neck?

Except that analogy would only work if the person worked in an abbatoir, and even that is tenuous as in abbatoirs animans are killed to provide meat rather than for fun.

Since the fuzz/CPS dont f*** about throwing murder charges around for fun, I think's it's probably safe to assume that they have a good reason and sufficient evidence to make the charge especially so quickly after the incident.

Your faith in the police/CPS is touching - is everyone who has ever been charged with murder guilty?

Stoner: fair point. Maybe a little rash comment.

Flash: you don't know me so your comments are as flippant as my own! Do you not like it when people have different opinions to you! Maybe you should remove your own post!

CFH

Of course we will never agree over hunting but your statement above is simply wrong. Hunts are cruel by their nature - its all about the thrill of the chase and the thrill of the kill ( or else drag hunts would be enough). The dogs are bred to be just faster than the fox so the chase lasts miles, Huntsmen have frequently been prosecuted for cruelty to the dogs, the dogs are killed once they get too old or are not quite up to standard, fox lairs ( bolts / dens???) are regularly dug up, fox cubs are killed, and worst of all hunts feed foxes to increase their numbers for the "sport"

"The unspeakable in pursuit of the inedible" sums it up nicely.

Of course we will never agree over hunting but your statement above is simply wrong. Hunts are cruel by their nature - its all about the thrill of the chase and the thrill of the kill ( or else drag hunts would be enough). The dogs are bred to be just faster than the fox so the chase lasts miles, Huntsmen have frequently been prosecuted for cruelty to the dogs, the dogs are killed once they get too old or are not quite up to standard, fox lairs ( bolts / dens???) are regularly dug up, fox cubs are killed, and worst of all hunts feed foxes to increase their numbers for the "sport"

"The unspeakable in pursuit of the inedible" sums it up nicely.

I see you've been brainwashed.

TJ, this isn't really about hunting. This is about murder charges.

Peter poddy - no - I read the evidence and make up my own mind.

Last time we had a debate on this I found reference of court reports that showed all of those things. The only thing that I cannot prove is the dogs bred specifically to be "just" faster than the fox. Everything else is fact as prosecutions for all those things are a matter of record

CFH - absolutely.

Want a bet the charges are reduced before it gets to court?

I am struggling with the murder bit. From what I know a gyrocopter is pushed along and can't reverse? So the poor guy must of walked into the prop?
Or thinking about it he could of been standing next to it when it pulled off and the edge of the prop caught him? The CPS may say this was deliberate done hence the charge?

Just out of interest, what has happened to the fox population since the ban?

Does anyone know?

I think there is obviously something that has not been reported/released about this incident to go with a murder charge so quickly after the incident.

There must be more to this than what has been reported.

[i]That'll be because sabs are law breaking ****s looking for a fight who don't give a sh1t about animal welfare and hunt followers are not. [/i]

LOL!! Hello masterfishfart, this is reality calling ! There are members of both sides in this who are thick ****s spoiling for a fight. There are sabs who care *deeply* for animal welfare, there are hunters who care *deeply* about, um, whatever it is they're trying to prove.

Anyway. The gyro/heli debate isn't as simple as transport/extravagant weapon. Straightforwardly, I wouldn't get in a heli with Noel Edmunds and Mr Blobby. But then I wouldn't run up to a landing gyro piloted by a crusty.

Presumably the point is that the pilot (?) of the gyrocopter intended to injure him if not kill him, which is sufficient for a murder charge (thanks for the law ref. Stoner - was going to suggest much the same last night, but decided I wasn't sure of my facts). I suspect it might not be that hard to prove that GBH was intended, given you must have a pretty good idea what's going to happen if you steer a gyrocopter at somebody - it's not an accident.

Fox population? Pretty static I believe perhaps a few more killed. Hunting with dogs has zero impact upon the population of foxes IIRC.

TJ - sure it's an unusual charge, doesn't mean it's impossible. People must have been done for murder by running folk over in cars etc?

Hunting killed about 13,000 foxes out of the population of about 200K- 250K per year last time figure were available.

Without wishing to enter the predictably mahoosive debate, couple of things to bear in mind.

A big healthy dog fox weighs maybe 10-15kgs, and even a small bitch hound comes in at twice that, with legs twice as long, and a physiology designed around running long distances. When hounds flush a fox into the open, it's never a fair fight, and generally it's done and dusted in about 10-15 minutes, with a bite to the back of the neck.

I'm not a supporter necessarily of hunting, but I have seen it first hand, and the "horror" and "violence" are generally blown out of proportion by the anti hunt lobby.

A bit of moderation on both sides wouldn't go amiss, TBH

cynical:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/7931499.stm

Detectives are continuing to question a man on suspicion of murder after an off-duty policeman was killed in a hit-and-run crash in Greater Manchester.

Pc Mike Silcock suffered head injuries when he was hit by a BMW Three Series coupe

grumm - my analogy drew on the fact that number2 was culpable by proxy if he was a meat eater, not that he drew the knife or fired the bolt himself. Mr Morse was a hunt follower, not a dog, or a hunt master. The point re eating/sport is fair, but not relevant to number2's rather unpleasant wisecrack about a dead man.

Thanks stoner. Must be tricky to prove intent though as TJ points out

*remains on fence*

I imagine if witnesses can testify to a deliberate/unneccesary change in direction or acceleration then the proof of intent to cause harm will be made more clear.

still loving the conclusions being jumped to on this thread, it's entertaining stuff, like

Presumably the point is that the pilot (?) of the gyrocopter intended to injure him if not kill him,

Presumably he's inoccent until a court of law deems otherwise, no?

"Murder by gyrocopter"

Not a bad way to go mind, he could have been ripped apart by a pack of wild dogs while still alive as middle class w@nkers watched on in glee.

Nick - the "point" was that if the cps have chosen to prosecute for murder then they must at least have some evidence of intention to injure. Drawing inferences from actions of the police and the law in which they operate is hardly "jumping to conclusions". Where he actually DID intend to injure will be upto the court but no-one here has tried and hung him yet. You're seeing lynching where there isnt one Im afraid.

Not a bad way to go mind

Of course not aracer - or at least not deliberatly

[i]"foxes aren't killed by the dogs at all nowadays"[/i]

Of course not, now when they're captured they're given a voucher to a michelin star restaurant for them and their foxy ladyfriend.

They've never had it so good.

They dont even run full tilt these days...

I wish all the bloody foxes would sod off back to the large estates rather than sniffing around my son's rabbit hutches.Anyway, they like the exercise in a hunt really, keeps 'em from doing bingo adverts.

Can gyrocopters take off from a treadmill ?

(sorry for flippant post but SOMEONE had to do it)

Depends if there's a hunt supporter running along the tradmill in front of them.

well they do have something of a history of being a bit mad...

[img] [/img]

I can't ever recall hearing of a manslaughter charge being upgraded to murder

The charge of murder could simply be a bookmark - so to speak

Nice thread - apart from the intervention of the league against cruel sports.

To give another view - if you don't hunt them with dogs you can always gas them, snare them or shoot them - none of which is a perticularly nice way to go. As to the hunt feeding the foxes up to hunt - that's just silly. Foxes eat partridges, pheasants and ducks - all of which are reared by the same lot that are chasing the foxes (to be shot at a later stage obviously) If you encouraged fox numbers they would wipe out all the birds and start onto their next best choice - baby lambs. Now I'm a bit of a hardened country boy but even I get a little emotional at the the thought of all those poor little baby fluffy lambs being eaten by nasty old foxes. It's why we country types put up with the one eyed in-bred upper classes chasing the little buggers around the country side - It keeps the numbers down.

Anyway back to the thread - being minced by a gyrocoptor is not a nice way to go.

Hugo - many proven cases of hunts feeding foxes to ensure a supply for hunting.

[i]many proven cases of hunts feeding foxes to ensure a supply for hunting. [/i]

off you go TJ and come back when you've got some links please.

I did it last time we had this debate - do I have to do so again?

If they were hunting spaniels or shetland ponys I'd have a problem with them but foxes are fundamentally vicious predators theat have a nasty tendancy to go into a killing frenzy when exposed to contained animals. If they were smart they'd have learned to run faster by now - F*** em 🙂

Nice to see another view from hugo rune

I seem to recall a conservation trust in Essex banned hunting on their land a few years before the law was introduced. They then found that the numbers of rare birds on their land was reducing apparently due to the increase in foxes taking them. The trust brought in a couple of marksmen to try and get the foxes, but after a month, they hadn't successfully shot one.

This is all from memory, can't find you sources.

I accept that fox hunting was cruel, but so are a lot of the alternatives, which may not be as "effective" at controlling numbers. And foxes will take small lambs, free range poultry etc when given a chance. I believe that there was a valid reason to keep it as an effective method of pest control. It also provided some jobs in the rural community for people who worked for the hunts. It wasn't just about the one eyed inbreds charging about in red coats.

And *some* surveys showed that more than 50% of the population weren't in favour of the ban - it wasn't that straight forward.

What was criminal was the amount of parliamentary time that was wasted by the government trying to get the law to go through - even though it is full of holes and incompetently drafted - given the lack of parliamentary time and scrutiny given to things like financial regulation, foreign wars, civil liberties etc etc.

I voted the incompetent buffoons in in 97 thinking a change was needed. The hunting law was the first time I realised what a mistake I'd made.

The hunting issue isn't about animal welfare, it's another classic case of patheticly misjudged class warfare. Swadey's post makes a good point that such a vast amount of time was put in to this, making it a far more emotive issue than it really needs to be, as a way of placating the left wing of the Labour party as Bliar and co rode roughshod over everything it stood for.

Also, looking at the pics of the chap who was killed in this incident, I'd hardly say he was some "braying toff" as I'm sure the antis would like to portay anyone involved with hunting.

"Even some among the hunting fraternity admit that some hunts use artificial earths and leave out animal carcasses to ensure a plentiful fox population. 'A few hunts do it and I have to say that I disapprove of it totally,' said Janet George, co-founder of the Countryside Action Network. 'There is no need to encourage them to breed. They will breed anywhere anyway.'

Some pro-hunters blame the creation of artificial earths on farmers seeking to control their fox populations. But a spokesman for the National Farmers' Union said this was unlikely. 'I would be amazed if farmers were involved. If hunts are using artificial earths for foxes, that would anger farmers,' he said"
[url] http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2002/feb/17/hunting.ruralaffairs [/url]

[url] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1341954/Beaufort-Hunt-broke-rules-on-fox-breeding.html [/url]

[url] http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/terence-blacker/foxhunting-a-twisted-tale-of-country-folk-714707.html [/url]

I have farmers amongst my family and they told me this was a regular practice. It is a simple fact also that hunts d not control fox numbers anyway - the numbers they kill are insignificant cmpared to the total number and a predator species such as foxes will allways expand to the maximum population the prey species can support.

It is not a class issue for me CFH - although I agree with you it is for many. Its a simple moral proposition. Killing animals for fun is immoral.

This argument can run and run and unfortunately[b] both sides[/b] use such ridiculous and easily disproved and discredited arguments that it can never easily be resolved.

But a spokesman for the National Farmers' Union said this was unlikely. 'I would be amazed if farmers were involved. If hunts are using artificial earths for foxes, that would anger farmers,' he said"

you forgot to remove that bit

I didn't forget to remove that bit - it shws that the hunts are not hunting for the good of the farmers.

Ex-Hunt Sab here.

Always makes me laugh the rubbish spouted about sabs. Take it from me, there are thugs on both sides. However in the 10 years I went out I saw far more sabs hospitalised than hunters.

As for this gyrocopter, I don't know what to make of it, but the parallels with the two sabs who were killed in the 90s by hunt supporters are striking. Somehow I doubt the end result will be the same though (no charges were brought against the hunt supporters).

I can understand why people don't want hunting to carry on, likewise I can see that being hunted is realistically no worse than being say run over, or dying of mange, or because you're just shagged out.

is there any chance some of the hunt sabs could hang around our garden to stop our neighbors fluffy chickens being tore apart by lovely fluffy cuddly foxes

(ex crustie who moved to live in the countryside and actually saw sense)

I'm half expecting John Nettles to appear and for the whole thing to turn out to be some kind of Midsommer murders escapade full of incest, a long lost father and death by gyrocopter...

I saw far more sabs hospitalised than hunters.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/1850703.stm - Standing in front of a cantering horse is going to get you injured.

there are thugs on both sides

Either way, if there is any truth in the allegation that led to this arrest, then I think the sad, pathetic sabs have sunk to a new low.

You will not prevent that without eradication of the foxes - thats how predator / prey relationships work. The predator population expands to meet the food supply - remove some foxes and the neighbouring ones breed more and move into the territory.

So by artificially increasing the prey species ( fluffy lambs / chickens ) we increase the predator population.

Hunts take a very small % of the fox population and will never eradicate them - indeed that is not thier aim

Somewhere there is a nice film clip of a couple of huntsmen riding at a group of women protesting about hunts and whipping them.

[url= https://www0.indymedia.org.uk/en/regions/london/2005/02/305092.html?c=on ]Some stills of huntsmen attacking protestors[/url]

CFH - shall we declare a draw and move on to something more interesting?

Probably best, TJ, as there's no way anyone will ever agree on something that really is rather trivial in the general scheme of things!

Back to the origins of the post, I think.

I've been in one of those crazy things. They're vile! Thing is, I really can't see what could have happened to lead to a murder charge unless there was deliberate movement and/or intent to harm.

I like the gyro in the Bond films. rocket launchers - its the only language those vermin undertand 😉

Like I said, it makes me laugh the rubbish that is spouted. You can choose to believe who you like. I've been there and seen it. But to counter your points:

1. How do you differentiate between a sab standing in front of a cantering horse and a hunter aiming at a sab at full gallop? The latter happened to me on numerous occasions.

2. I never once saw sabs with claw hammers or baseball bats, and I've been on some pretty hairy sabs. However it's not to say it didn't happen. What I would say is that any incidents like this were usually in response to a sab being deliberately maimed (or killed) by members of a hunt, usually the terrier men/supporters. It's probably not too far off the mark to say that in some parts of the country a war was being fought with many tit-for-tat attacks on both sides.

What you fail to acknowledge though is that a large majority of sabs, and indeed hunt members were perfectly peaceful and never got involved in any of this, it's just a pity the violence on both sides overshadows everything else.

Some stills of huntsmen attacking protestors

Fox hunting is cruel and unecessary - I much prefer a shotgun 😉