A Mind to Murder (Inspector Adam Dalgliesh Mystery)

Product Information

The legal position remains: there is no case to answer (nor could a jury properly convict) for the offences of murder or manslaughter where the prosecution cannot prove who killed the victim. A Mind to Murder (1995): Dalgliesh, assisted by Detective Chief Inspector John Martin ( Robert Pugh), is called in following the grotesque murder of a middle-aged woman. the unlawful act must have been committed by a person who was a member of the same household as the victim;

They meet by chance awkwardly at a Catholic church and decide to share coffee as well as some insights about the clinic and the people there. When they are done, Saxon insists on paying for her own coffee which leads Dalgliesh to thinking:Kanter, Jake (20 October 2020). "Acorn TV & Channel 5 To Adapt P.D. James' Inspector Dalgliesh Mysteries With Bertie Carvel Starring". Deadline . Retrieved 26 August 2021. Not too much to say about this one. I thought it was a solid mystery for the second book in the Adam Dalgliesh series. I just found myself getting bored after a while since it was really obvious who the murderer was (at least to me). There are some other secrets that are spilled, but other than a couple of major ones at the end, none of the rest had much to do with anything I thought. I do think the flow could have been tighter too. We just stayed too long with the suspects and I wanted to be walked through Dalgliesh's brain as he figured out the guilty party. Too bad though that this one shows how Dalgliesh was off about who done it and why. As the onus is on the defendant to establish diminished responsibility on the balance of probabilities, they are likely to need to obtain expert evidence in support. The prosecution will then review the case. In some cases it may not be necessary to obtain evidence from a further expert, because the defence expert evidence (on paper, or when challenged in cross-examination) is unlikely to substantiate the defence. More usually, the prosecution will need to obtain evidence from a further expert. As part of the ongoing duty of review, the prosecution will further review the case. In doing so, it should be borne in mind that the jury is not bound to accept medical evidence and that the evidence, especially when tested through cross-examination, may not meet the elements of diminished responsibility. See the prosecution guidance on Experts.

Prosecutors should ask whether the weight to be attached to the factors tending against prosecution quite clearly outweigh not only any factors tending in favour of prosecution but also the expectation that a prosecution would almost certainly be required in the public interest. Only if they clearly outweigh the countervailing factors would it be appropriate not to prosecute on public interest grounds; otherwise, the considerations will potentially be relevant to the acceptance of pleas and sentence. Handling and Referral If no alternative is included on the indictment, the prosecution must decide when the jury retires to consider their verdict on murder whether to seek a re-trial if the jury cannot agree, or whether it would be prepared to accept the alternative (manslaughter). The clinic is kept running smoothly by Miss Bolam, whom nobody particularly likes. In the last book, Cover Her Face, James also had a murder victim whom nobody particularly liked, and I do hope she doesn’t overuse this method of ensuring lots of potential suspects. Adam Dalgliesh is the man to work his way through the list of possible murderers, and we learn a little more about him—that’s he’s a moderately successful poet on the side, that he still has a thing for Deborah Risko, a suspect from the first book, and that his wife died. All in the cause of making him a little more three-dimensional, but only, really, a little bit more. As a man he just doesn’t float my boat, which is a shame because it helps to fall for the detective as you read through the series. This is necessarily a more uncertain and complicated exercise. It is required because the procedural and evidential provisions mean that the decision to charge cannot take place on the basis of the suspect's likely acquittal at the close of the prosecution case. It should not be a speculative exercise. A defendant's evidence may of course theoretically take many forms. Prosecutors only need to take into account real possibilities as to the form it might take, rather than fanciful ones. This means considering each scenario on the information available at charge. Both, that the suspect may not give evidence at all, or that they give evidence in accordance with any account or other available information suggesting the nature of their defence. In the former scenario, considering what inferences appear proper to draw; in the latter, the likely challenges, strengths and weaknesses of this account. A person, acting in pursuance of a suicide pact between themselves and another, who kills the other or is a party to the other being killed by a third person, is guilty of manslaughter and not murder ( section 4 of the Homicide Act 1957). The defendant must satisfy the jury on the balance of probabilities that there was a suicide pact in existence, and if so, that the defendant at the time of the killing was acting in pursuance of it and had a settled intention of dying in pursuance of it. Involuntary Manslaughter

An objective test (the third component): A person of D's sex and age, with a normal degree of tolerance and self-restraint and in the circumstances of D, might have reacted in the same or in a similar way to D. Further, the case may proceed to the jury based on proper inferences drawn from silence even if there would otherwise be no case for the defendant to answer. Responsibilities of the prosecutor: charging, and at the close of the case Where there is other offending in addition to murder, prosecutors should consider whether additional charges are merited, notwithstanding that conviction for murder will result in a life sentence. Additional charges may be merited as part of presenting the case, for instance. They may serve to focus the jury on making findings of fact in relation to events prior to the murder. Additional charges may reflect important aggravating features of the case which fall to be considered by the judge in setting the minimum term. They may be relevant if the defendant is to be released on licence, for instance, if they demonstrate a risk of future sexual offending.

Series 1, Episodes 1 & 2: Shroud for a Nightingale: In January 1975, a student nurse dies during a training demonstration and Dalgliesh (Carvel) is sent to investigate, accompanied by his partner DS Charles Masterson ( Jeremy Irvine). [33]The trial judge should consider the three components sequentially. If sufficient evidence is adduced to raise this defence, on which in the opinion of the trial judge a jury, properly directed, could reasonably apply, then the prosecution must disprove loss of control beyond reasonable doubt. For the relevant law and jury directions for loss of control, see the Judicial College's Crown Court Compendium, Part I, at 19-3. At trial, if a plea of manslaughter would not be acceptable, this alternative count need not appear on the indictment for the jury. The exception would be where the prosecution concludes there is a real (rather than a fanciful) prospect of the jury finding the defendant guilty of manslaughter, and if the jury were not sure of the defendant's guilt on the charge of murder, the prosecution, after a trial for murder, would accept a guilty verdict on the charge of manslaughter i.e. not seek a re-trial for murder. The addition of an alternative count in these circumstances is therefore simply an indication about the prosecution position should the jury not convict of murder. For the role and responsibilities of the judge in this regard, see R v Foster (Mark) [2007] EWCA Crim 2869. A Taste for Death (1988): Dalgliesh sets up the Sensitive Crimes Squad and faces an immediate challenge. Featuring Penny Downie as Inspector Kate Miskin.