We believe Mary Maloney is guilty of manslaughter. This accusation is made because she committed this murder through a heat of passion caused by a sudden provocation. In this case the provocation was that her husband seeked a divorce, which caused the following event.
I agree that Mary Maloney murdered her husband through a heat of passion. We can see this when she came back from downstairs and he said "I'm leaving. Don't make me anything" (not exactly word for word ). Although I agree that it was in the heat of passion, I do not agree that it was because of him discussing to her about a divorce (we have no proof that it was a divorce statement), because if it was due to the divorce(alleged) statement that Patrick Maloney made, she wouldn't have tried to make him dinner. I believe that the heat of passion was at the moment when Patrick Maloney was facing towards the window and said he "had to leave", provoking her to hit him due to him seeming as though he didn't care about her or her child.
I believe Mary Maloney is guilty of man slaughter, first degree and second degree murder is a planned murder. Mary was aggravated and was in the heat of the moment. Mr. Maloney wanted a divorce and Mary reacted in a harmful way. The murder was deliberate but not planned. Mary insisted in feeding Patrick and made a shocking twist and ended up killing him after he asked for a divorce.
I don't agree with you that it was man slaughter. Mary Maloney carried the leg of lamb up the stairs as if holding a weapon. At that time, she knew she was going to kill him. She also knew the consequences of killing Patrick. Therefore it was planned.
Other than that you stated your opinion and found proof to support your answer. Good job!
However, in the text it says that she picked up the first thing she felt, and with intent of making her husband a good dinner. So I agree with Kayla B, it was manslaughter.
We believe that Marry Maloney is guilty with manslaughter; because she did not deliberately mean to kill her husband, but once she had realized what she had done, she had phoned the police. And once they came to investigate, she tried, and successfully achieved getting away with the murder by cooking the lamb (the weapon) and the police got rid of the evidence by eating the lamb chop.
I disagree with your opinion. Some key words in the story, that Mary thought to herself, before killing Patrick "without any pause she swung the leg of lamb... as hard as she could on the back of his head". In my opinion, this action was definitely deliberate and she meant to kill him. You did have good evidence to back up your point and I enjoyed reading your comment.
We (Jahal Greusus) think that Mary Malone should be treated with 2nd degree murder, because it was not planned, it just happened in the moment. It was only because Mr.Malone wanted a divorce.
I disagree to your statement that " it was not planned" because it happened in the heat of passion. Mary Moloney was provoked as Patrick Moloney did not have the legal right to leave her in that stage of pregnacy and he showed no emotion as well which made her more angry. Patrick had no right to provoke Mary without discussing details about the unborn child. Therefore I believe that it was done in the heat of passion and not planned.
That doesnt just mean that she can go all willy nilly physco and murder him! there were other options.
Another reason Mary Maloney should not be tried for premeditated since there were signs of her snapping in and out of her insane sate after killing Patrick Maloney. Mary Maloney was in a trace when she saw Mr. Maloney after returning from the kitchen. But after killing him, she regained her conscious. After killing her husband, “her mind became clear all of a sudden.” In addition, when she was about to kill Patrick Maloney, she “simply walked up behind him and without any pause, she swung the big frozen leg of lamb high into the air….”. This shows that she did not have any control over her actions until she heard the loud crash. Further more, after killing her husband, she “came out slowly, feeling cold and surprised, and she stood for a few minutes looking at the body….” This proves that she did not know what she did and it took a while to register what happened, which shows that it was not a planned attack.
Mary Maloney is innocent and shouldn't be sentenced to anything because we don't know for sure if she had an mental illness.Mary was starting to become intoxicated and she was also pregnant and hormonal.On top of that she was receiving terrible news which was getting divorce.So she acted in a rash way.
Just because she is pregnant doesn't make her innocent
ANYBODY CAN HAVE A MENTAL ILLNESS
you can say anybody with a mental illness that kills somebody is innocent
but I do agree, she did act in a rash way.
In this case it is manslaughter. Mary has just found out that her husband (Patrick) wants a divorce and she is 6 months pregnant. This news provoked her and without time to cool down her feelings she killed him. The reason there will be trouble finding the murder weapon is due to the fact the detectives ate it. She was smart enough to make the detectives eat the only evidence there is. Without the technology she will not be found guilty.
I did not think of the evidence being disposed of, and how it would affect her sentencing. In this sense, I love how you took that small fact, and showed the real world implications. However, the criminal code of Canada states that "Provocation is a wrongful act or insult...sufficient to deprive an ordinary person of the power of self-control"(section 232). As it was not wrong for Patrick to want divorce, OR to tell his wife this fact, and it was not a wrongful insult, the law would not accept a confession of manslaughter.
I believe Mary Maloney is innocent because she was provoked, although she killed her husband in the phisical form. However he killed her emotions and her future. She loved him with all her heart and no matter what, she would never leave him. When he divorced her, he was ungratefull for all she did for him, thus leaving her alone with her unborn child. Her sentence would be a couple of months in a supervised living centre until her child is born then she will be realised under supervison in case of further incidents.
Your paragraph was well done but there are a few key mistakes I'd like to point out. It is not proven that he was going to divorce her, that was an assumption. Your paragraph honestly has the right idea because you know what the conflict was and you had a valid point, but I find your argument very flawed, reread the story to fully understand instead of making random assumptions.
Although the word “divorce” is never mentioned in the text, it does say that “Of course I’ll give you money and see you’re looked after. But there needn’t really be any fuss. I hope not anyway. It wouldn’t be very good for my job. Her first instinct was not to believe any of it, to reject it all. It occurred to her that perhaps he hadn’t even spoken, that she herself had imagined the whole thing.” When the husband says “I’ll give you money and see you’re looked after” this means he will be going away for sometime without her. Also, based on Mary’s reaction to her husband’s words, it is not good news that he is telling her. all of this evidence points to the fact that patrick divorced marry, although this is said indirectly.
I believe Mary Maloney is guilty of Manslaughter because, the moment she hit him in the head she knew she had killed him, but i think what forced her to hit him him was the fact that she was provoked by her husband telling her that he wanted a divorce.
her husband said nothing about a divorce and after she killed him, someone who was feeling guilt would confess to the police but she decided to hop down to the store get food, lie to the police and dispose of the murder weapon, giggling all the way.
good try laddie
what do you mean, him him?
I believe that she is guilty of second degree murder. All of my reasons are based on the official Canadian Criminal Code at http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=bc4804bd-660c-493d-aeb1-3474f182af18
Firstly, even though the murder was not planned, she killed her husband intentionally. This murder did happen in the "heat of the moment", but she was not drunk and had full control over her actions, as specifically stated by the author in the lines; "and she poured herself a weaker blend of alcohol". This is not a case of manslaughter as a killing in the "heat of passion" is when there is a confrontation such as a robbery. The author clearly portrays that her husband was very calm, therefore proving that if she were caught, she would have been convicted of second degree murder.
Your paragraph was very interesting to read.Very good job proving your point using quotes. I disagree with your point that the murder was not in the heat of passion because she was not under the influence of alcohol. The Criminal Code does not suggest that "heat of passion" is caused by the influence of alcohol but that it is "cause[d] by sudden provocation [which] is a wrongful act or insult". Patrick Maloney provoked her by confronting Mary about leaving her and does not discuss the details of the divorce, which is against the divorce laws.
Good job! I look forward to reading your work in the future.
this was really good man, far out, very rock 'n' roll
I really liked the point you made , but some of your comments were a little unnecessary ,so maybe just work on shortening your info.You did a very good job of structuring your paragraph!!!Also I disagree that heat of passion is only when you have a confrontation, because heat of passion can also mean something angers you or physically affects you.
Andrei forgot to include my name on the paragraph, just to let you know i was his partner.
Mary Maloney committed manslaughter in the short story "Lamb to the Slaughter". One evening when Mr. Patrick Maloney returned home from a long day of work, he had shared some bad news with Mary, which caused her to go into shock and rage and in the heat of the moment she ended up killing her husband. Mary was in her right mind when this incident occurred, and if there were any proof, should be guilty. Also the fact that her husband asked for a divorce when she is six months pregnant proves that she is not the sweet wife that the audience was introduced to in the story. In my opinion Mary Maloney is guilty of manslaughter.
By saying she was in her right mind, you are arguing against your point. If it was manslaughter, it would be in the heat of the moment and therefore she wouldn't be in the right frame of mind.
I understand what you mean how it was not clear but I meant that Mrs.Maloney had not had that much to drink it even states in the stroy " Then she walked over and made the drinks, a strongish one for him, a weak one for herself." This is what I meant when I said she was in her right mind. Mrs.Maloney had complete control over her actions when she killed her husband.
You had very good sentence structure and wrote a proper paragraph, so good job. This was a very interesting opinion to read
In my opinion, Mary Maloney is guilty of manslaughter. Due to Mary's husband's actions and provoking of Mary; she lost control of herself and was in a state of shock and sadness. In which, it resulted in the death of Patrick Maloney within the heat of Mary's confusion. To elaborate on that note, Mary was not planning to kill her husband; on the contrary, to make him a nice dinner, but he refused and Mary panicked. In conclusion, Mary Maloney committed manslaughter because of the lose of her self-control.
I had a different opinion but your opinion was okay. I don't think he had lost control.
Improvements: Use grammar check and use more information from the text. Possibly use quotes from the text as well to prove your point
It was interesting to read a different point of view about the story. Mary had committed a second degree murder not manslaughter.
But where is your evidence that Mary committed second degree murder? Plus, I did use information from the text but I explained why and how.
P.S check your grammar as well
In this case Mary Maloney is guilty of manslaughter because she did not plan to murder him until he had told her that he wanted to divorce her while she was 6 months pregnant so she got upset and did not have sometime to relax and kinda flipped and as a result murdered him.
I disagree with you because Mary killed her husband in the heat of passion. o begin with, she has a peaceful nature because while she waited for her husband to come home from work, there was a "slow smiling air about her, and about everything she did... laid aside her sewing, stood up, and went forward to kiss him as he came in" (1). This explains that an innocent woman like Mary Maloney couldn't have planned to kill Patrick Maloney as she was waiting for her husband to get home so that she could enjoy his company and make him dinner.
- More Proof from story - Use Quotations,
- Write in more Sentences
- Keep in mind your reader needs to breathe
well murdering her husband in heat of passion is still murder despite her enjoying his company she was upset when it came to the thought of him leaving and flipped.
Mary Maloney is guilty of manslaughter. This is because she had not intended to kill her husband in the first place, she had just wanted to grab a leg of lamb. The reason she had murdered her husband was because he had provoked her by being rude and obnoxious after divorcing her, while she had a lethal weapon in her hand. She had lost control of herself and in her blind rage killed him. That is how Mary Meloney commited manslaughter.
Right after Patrick told Mary about the bad news, "she couldn't feel anything at all" (1). This disproves the theory of the "blind rage" but I think that your point of Patrick being rude and obnoxious is a strong point that clearly supports your case.
If she couldn't feel anything at all, doesn't that mean she's in a blind rage? Since you know when you have those times where you're so mad you can't feel anything(like pain).
In my opinion, Mary Maloney should be charged with second degree murder. I think this because Mary Maloney did not intend to kill her husband, but she did. She only grabbed the lamb out of the freezer because it was the first thing she touched. What I mean is, if the first thing she grabbed was a fish, it would be hard to kill someone with a frozen fish. If she intended to kill her husband, Mary would have looked for a specific piece of meat or have used something else like a knife. Yes, she did kill her husband, but she only meant to harm him. It was just the right place at the right time for there to be a large frozen lamb that she grabbed. Therefore Mary Maloney should be charged with second degree murder.
Very good argument although I felt she was slightly instigated, but you did make a good point of how it wouldn't be first degree!
Thanks to everyone who participated in this activity.
This blog is now closed.