“Not all killings are offences. For a crime to be regarded as a crime you must establish the ingredient and the intention. A stray bullet does not amount to a crime. If I am targeting somebody for a justification, and the bullet hits a person who is not my target, that is not an offence” – CID Spokesperson Charles Twine (Tabu Butagira – ‘Govt probe report on November riots leaks’ 17.05.2021, Daily Monitor).
The Spokesperson for the Directorate of Criminal Investigations (CID) is saying this. Which is supposed to this: “The function of the Directorate is to ensure effective detection, investigation and prevention of crime”. The CID is supposed to detect, investigate and prevent crime. However, it is not supposed to mask over or skip over crimes.
The CID shouldn’t erase crimes and it should be accountable for the actions of others. That the CID spokesperson isn’t preventing crimes here. It is instead allowing crimes being done. Let me explain this below. First with important codes from the Penal Codes, which is enacted and is law of the land. Especially, with the ideals the spokesperson is putting forward.
“187. Manslaughter
(1)Any person who by an unlawful act or omission causes the death of another person commits the felony termed manslaughter.
(2)An unlawful omission is an omission amounting to culpable negligence to discharge a duty tending to the preservation of life or health, whether such omission is or is not accompanied by an intention to cause death or bodily harm.
188. Murder
Any person who of malice aforethought causes the death of another person by an unlawful act or omission commits murder” (Penal Code – Chapter XVIII, 15.06.1950).
We can easily see here what the Penal Code says about manslaughter and murder, which can be assessed to similar fashion of what the spokesperson is speaking off. He is calling “killings” not “offences” and I will disagree. That is degrading the laws and invalidating it.
The Penal Code is very clear… and that should be important the way forward. He speaks of intention. However, the law doesn’t have any sort of specifics or talk about motivation of the actor. The man behind the gun doesn’t need a motive or even a reason to do what he does. Since a person who causes death of another person commits manslaughter. That is the law and there is no say of intention. Just the result of the act done…. and the sudden demise of someone else. The death of somebody done with a action, which is seen as unlawful.
Therefore, there is no real talk of intention or target. The use of force, the bullet itself and that it kills is the main objective here. The person who does the “unlawful act” is the one in question. The person who kills and shoots the stray bullet. Not that they are targeting or having intentions. That is very clear. There is no middle ground or any sort of mechanism in law, which differs stray-bullets from other bullets. They are both bullets and use of force, which is an act that can be deemed “unlawful” and there be subject to manslaughter or murder charge. That is why the Penal Code says what it says.
It is tragic that the CID spokesperson doesn’t know the Penal Code, which have existent since 1950 and I do. That say more about him, than about me. A killer is a killer, no matter what his intention or act was as long as its fatal and causes the death of the person. Peace.
MinBane 