There are lot of people this morning saying that one of Jamie Bulger's killers being

[Burney]

Look at it this way. With murder and attempted murder we group the two crimes by intent (to kill) but sentence them according to effect (death or otherwise). With murder and manslaughter we group the effect (death) but sentence according to intent.

So we can all agree it is worse to intentionally kill someone (intent and effect) than to do it by accident (effect alone). We also seem to agree that it is worse to intentionally kill someone than to try and **** it up (intent but not effect). The grey area is whether attempted murder (intent) is worse than manslaughter (unintended effect).

So what Do we deem more serious, the intent or the effect?

Well if you regard law as a means to protect society, one could argue that the attempted murderer should serve just as long as the successful killer. After all, the person has demonstrated a willingness and desire to kill, which makes them no less dangerous to the public at large than if they'd succeeded. There, it seems to me, is where our insistence on consequence-based sentencing falls down badly.

[Peter]

Well if you regard law as a means to protect society, one could argue that the attempted murderer should serve just as long as the successful killer. After all, the person has demonstrated a willingness and desire to kill, which makes them no less dangerous to the public at large than if they'd succeeded. There, it seems to me, is where our insistence on consequence-based sentencing falls down badly.

If we are protecting society from his murderous intent I would rather be protected from the chap who is good at it, but I take your point.

You could also argue that the guy who ****ed it up has learned his lesson and is less likely to **** it up next time.

[Burney]

If we are protecting society from his murderous intent I would rather be protected from the chap who is good at it, but I take your point.

You could also argue that the guy who ****ed it up has learned his lesson and is less likely to **** it up next time.

Quite. And, of course, this is where the capital punishment thing becomes interesting. After all, as you say, a chap who attempts murder but fails will come out of prison while still relatively young as a person who is still capable of and willing to kill. I could make a good public safety case for capital punishment that that man should be turned off now because he's demonstrated that he has that club in his bag and it's better to end him before he actually succeeds. That to me would be more logical than only executing the successful killer.