Find Your Valentine
Slog
News & ArtsFriday, November 20, 2009
Crime The Man Who Killed His Wife With His Dreaming Hands Is Cleared
Posted by Charles Mudede on Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 8:47 AM
The BBC reports:
A husband who killed his wife while he said he had a dream about an intruder has been cleared of her murder.This might be the case of the decade. The verdict has great philosophical consequences and complications. If you are not you when you are dreaming, then who are you exactly? This means that much of your life, which is taken up by sleep, is not you but someone else. The wife was killed by a shadowy someone else who is beyond the limits of the law. You are a kind, loving husband; your dreaming is murderous and insane. The two are not one. These are strange times.
Brian Thomas, 59, admitted killing Christine, 57, in their camper van, but blamed his rare sleep disorder.
He was discharged after the judge told the jury to return a not guilty verdict at Swansea Crown Court after the death at Aberporth, Ceredigion.
The judge told Mr Thomas, of Neath, that "in the eyes of the law you bear no responsibility for the events".
1
You should put dinner and drinks for 5 with Chaz up for auction as part of Strangercrombie. It is almost painful to read his nonsense, but for some reason I can't stop myself. I would bid on the dinner... if I wasn't poor and 1000 miles away.
3
Well...isn't there another way to look at it Charles? Perhaps the court was judging the dream world as "real" thereby making the wife the intruder; thus, justifying the murder due to self-defense. So, the man was himself, and justified in his actions.
...philosophically speaking, of course.
...philosophically speaking, of course.
4
Two things - he might not be strictly guilty, but isn't he still a danger? And why is there a jury if the judge is telling them what the verdict is?
7
@1 i just finished reading the above post and then read your comment ... my pre-coffee brain thought you were referring to chaz bono. and i thought, wait, what?
8
Anyone else not believe this guy's story at all?
I just flat out do not believe you could strangle someone to death without waking up. I do not buy it.
I just flat out do not believe you could strangle someone to death without waking up. I do not buy it.
9
Huh? Seems pretty straightforward to me - the court decided that the murder was involuntary.
If you buy his story, he no more committed murder than the sleepwalker who dies falling down the stairs committed suicide.
If you buy his story, he no more committed murder than the sleepwalker who dies falling down the stairs committed suicide.
11
i totally believe this story. i have seen a LOT of crazy stuff from my husband while he is sleeping.
12
There's a difference between "being you" and "being conscious of your actions". The law provides lenience for *you* if you're not in control of yourself. The man now has to live with the horror of being a person who cannot be trusted to sleep around other people.
13
You can't draw a philosophical conclusion based on a not guilty verdict. A judge and jury deciding someone should not be punished does not change what happened. Just because he is a free man doesn't conclude that he became a different man at different times. Mostly this just means the courts realized it benefits nobody if he is sent to jail. Neither him or the deceased or her family or society would see any benefit to jailing him.
14
It's not about him being two different people; it's that he was unconscious at the time. Committing a crime while unconscious is not an intentional crime, since the man had no control over what he did. His body acted without his mind's consent. He is not two people, his brain just has a faulty ability to shut off his motor skills while he sleeps.
15
I believe it. I know someone who has night terrors and has done some wild things for long periods of time during sleep. Most of the time the person is under the impression that someone is out to get them during these night terrors. I've witnessed him running through the apartment, hiding, even going to extreme measures to escape the area so much that he's hurt himself. It's legit shit, folks.
17
No - he was himself. He was not murderous and insane. He murdered an intruder. The intruder was not the person he was supposed to be. Perception is at fault here. The wife was not a wife.
18
#4 - I agree that the man is still dangerous. Imagine if he decides his next wife should die. Guess he could preten that the dream happened again... Or just imagine he really does dream this again. He should be tied to the bed every night. He should date only dominatrix. Dammit what's the plural!
19
#8 - I have a hard time believing it as well. I don't have experience with anything like this at all. If I try to move when I am still asleep my body is frozen. I don't understand how he could get past that sleeping kill switch... I guess it happens tho. It is outside of our experience I think, so hard to believe.
20
@8 - total believe it.
A lot of ex-military and active military are this way. Knowing what I now know about states of consciousness and which portions of the brain are working and at what level, it's not surprising at all.
A lot of ex-military and active military are this way. Knowing what I now know about states of consciousness and which portions of the brain are working and at what level, it's not surprising at all.
22
There are rare sleep disorders that cause prolonged sleepwalking phases and behavior just like this. The only reason you don't PHYSICALLY DO EVERYTHING IN YOUR DREAMS, Charles, is because your brain effectively paralyzes your body to prevent you from doing so. If that switch doesn't get flipped, well, this sort of thing can happen. If you tripped while getting onto your soapbox, it might have been on the stacks of research you should've read before opening your mouth.
25
@4 - juries are finders of fact. If the man is not guilty (as a matter of law) because he is not responsible for his actions, then there is no need for the jury to decide whether he killed his wife or not. Of course, it does get pretty wishy-washy sometimes - in this case, is it a matter of law (if the man is not responsible for his actions due to dreaming), or a matter of fact (was the man truly dreaming).
Other than that, I agree with 9, 12, and 14 - it isn't that he "isn't himself" while he was dreaming, it's that he isn't responsible for his actions while unconscious.
Other than that, I agree with 9, 12, and 14 - it isn't that he "isn't himself" while he was dreaming, it's that he isn't responsible for his actions while unconscious.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
SL Letter of the Day: Pill The Homos! by Dan Savage
-
Dear Huffington Post... by Dan Savage
-
The Rick Santorum Rally in Tacoma Probably Could Have Gone Better by Paul Constant
-
Because Guns Make Us More Safer by Goldy
-
Slog Bible Study: Deuteronomy 21:10-14 by Goldy
-
Because Guns Make Us Safer by Goldy
-
Gay Kids Are Still Killing Themselves by Dan Savage
-
Prospecting Science by Charles Mudede
-
Google Briefly Acknowledges the Existence of Gay Couples—and Princess/Frog Couples—on Valentine's Day by Dan Savage
-
Gregoire: "This is signed!" by Eli Sanders
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (25) RSS