You can translate them into English.

Then that would be murder.

However, it assumes that the driver knew the kid was still alive at the point of impact, and I don't think we have that information?

If you can prove that he knew the kid was alive at the point of impact, you still have to PROVE that he then took a conscious decision to continue driving until he knew the kid was dead. How would you prove in a court of law that this was the driver's thought process?

It is virtually impossible to prove what someone was thinking.....unless there happened to be a tape recorder lying in the back of the car.....with the "record" button depressed.....and the driver just happened to say to his wife "I think I am going to continue driving until the kid is dead". Then you've got your proof.

However, if the kid was turfed off his motorbike into the path of a car and the driver of that car knew he was turfed off into the path of his/her car but couldn't be sure if the motorcyclist was alive or dead, what assumptions are we safe to make about that driver if their choice is to continue driving knowing, or being fairly sure, that the body of said motocyclist, maybe dead but maybe alive, is under your car? What does the decision to continue driving (and possibly involving multiple drivings in multiple directions) over said body, say about the driver and his/her intentions?
So........does manslaughter exist in the Spanish system?

From the link in post 24

"The doctors who examined the teenager’s body told the Alicante provincial court on Thursday that the youngster suffered damage to his femoral artery and went into shock from the extreme loss of blood. The experts ruled out that his injuries were sustained when he collided with a first vehicle, before being hit by the car occupied by the British couple who are on trial for his death."

Yes, manslaughter exists. Murder is the intentional killing of someone, and manslaughter is when you kill someone, but the "intent" was either lacking or (as is often the case) cannot be proved.


El homicidio

El delito de homicidio consiste en quitar la vida a una persona con la voluntad o la intención de hacerlo. Homicide, or murder, is when you take someone's life willingly or with the intention to do so.

La pena

El delito de homicidio está castigado con la pena de prisión de 10 a 15 años. It carries 10-15 years in prison.



Si el delito se comete por imprudencia (por un descuido y sin la intención de hacerlo), la pena de prisión será de 1 a 4 años, y si dicha imprudencia se ha cometido utilizando un vehículo a motor, un ciclomotor, o un arma de fuego, se impondrá, además, la pena de privación de la correspondiente licencia administrativa (permiso de conducir o licencia de armas) de 1 a 6 años.

If the crime was committed by an "imprudence" such as carelessness but without INTENT the prison sentence is reduced to 1-4 years. If this imprudence was committed with a vehicle, moto, firearm, then the corresponding licence (driving or firearms) is confiscated for 1-6 years.

Yes, we know that the kid didn't die at the point of impact, but can you prove that the DRIVER knew this? You can't, and he is unlikely to admit it. It is the driver's state of mind that will determine if it was murder or another offence given that "intent" is a state of mind. It is never easy proving someone's state of mind in a court of law.

Can I point out that if this was in the UK, it would be classed as a motoring offence, causing death by careless/ reckless/ dangerous driving. It would not carry the same sentence as murder or manslaughter. Maybe it's the same here?

the POINT is HE KILLED THE BOY. at any point along those 2 km he could have stopped and sought help for him. He CHOSE not to..there is the MALICE aforethought

Not really. There is no dispute that he killed the boy, this is not the point we are discussing. What we are discussing is which offence he committed. Unless he admits that it was his intention to kill the boy....that is, he planned it beforehand (and let's face it...who is going to admit that?) then he is more likely to be found guilty of one of the lesser charges such as manslaughter.

Choosing not to stop and help is a reaction to a situation, not forward planning.

In the UK all motoring offences are criminal offences and have been for around 20 years. The current maximum sentence for "death by dangerous driving" is 14 years, one year longer than the Spanish maximum. Careless driving carries a maximum punishment of 5 penalty points and a £2500 fine (but I believe there was a review in 2005 trying to change this). There is no such offence as "death by careless driving" since with careless driving offences the consequences of the offence are not taken into account, only the run up to the offence. And, by the way, it would be considered murder or manslaughter if that offence were deliberate. I.e. driving the car deliberately into the victim (manslaughter) or with the intent to cause death or serious harm (murder).
Of course there is not. He wasn't trying to kill the victim, he was trying to escape.

For personal reasons, I don't want to go into this any further on a public forum having been related to a victim, but will suggest that people refer to the attached link.
http://www.sentencing-guidelines.gov...k%20or%20drugs

Mate are you attempting to condone this creatures actions ?

You have in fact contradicting your own argument. You state ", by the way it would be considered manslaughter or murder if that offence were deliberate. I.e driving the car........."

The fact is, it did deliberately drive the car into, or at least over its victim.
It came upon an accident scene, then unable to drive AROUND the unfortunate kid, it decided to drive over the victim, dragging the poor kid for 2km, only attempting to release the unfortunate victim, when it realised there was a witness !

There are no justifications for this things actions, NONE at all !

I believe in justice. Whatever this individual did, it would not be justice to convict him of an offence he did not commit, such as murder.

You have edited what I said to try to make it fit your argument.

You can't have your cake and eat it. If he was "unable to drive around" he obviously didn't "decide to drive over the victim".

How ever disgusted you are may be by this individual's actions those actions occurred after this situation was thrust upon him. I doubt the guy ever had a cognitive thought that if I do X then Y will happen.

yes he did. You speak as though you think there were only 2 options, driving round or driving over. He could have stopped. If he couldn't drive round the victim, and leave an injured or dead person on the road, he could have chosen to stop. He chose to drive over. What would you have done?

Deliberately driving round and leaving the victim would have been the wrong choice anyway and would still mean he was an uncaring fool unfit to be on the road.

If this had been your son, would you be prepared to shake this driver's hand and say "I know you didn't mean it, mate" ?

It`s also an offence in Spain to be at the site of an accident and not render assistance.