What form of murder is the hardest to prove in court?

Question

oh no reason i was just wondering really....

Answer 1

The murder of the prosecuting attorney.


C'MON PEOPLE...get it? If the prosecuting attorney is murdered, it can't be proven in court....cause there's no prosecution.......Eh? EH? It's a joke.

Tough crowd....

Answer 2

Circumstantial murder. It is where no body is found. Where no eyewitness is found. Where the evidence is there but nothing leads to a conclusive suspect. It is sometimes called the perfect murder.

Murder is murder, there is no real form of murder. It goes under several levels depending on the motive for the crime and whether that murder was premeditated (preplanned) or spur of the moment

The penalty for premeditated murder in the US and in most States of that Union is death. In other nations they eliminated the death penalty and supplanted the penalty as a life sentence in prison.

Premeditated murder is called 1st degree murder in most British class judicial systems. Spur of the moment or passion murder is defined as 2nd degree murder. Accidental or unintentional murder can be called as such or commonly known as manslaughter.

The hardest for the prosecutor to prove is quite often 1st degree murder. First part of the preplanning of a murder is always a coverup of the intention of the murder. The corpse is disposed of or often partially destroyed. Eyewitnesses are hard to find and often the recall of eyewitnesses is notoriously unreliable.

Along with this the death penalty in this modern day requires a measure of preciseness. It is very hard to prove premeditation which is why many prosecutors offer the lesser penalty of "2nd degree murder" or "Manslaughter" on the signed confession of the suspect.

While vile in concept, this trade off is a huge cost saving device since the shortened trial and the satiation of justice are both satisfied. Depending on the jurisdiction the average murder trial, the one's that barely make a dent on page one of the local fish wrap newspaper will require at least $two million dollars.

Now many murderers feel that the weight of evidence will carry no sway before a jury which is why many murderers seek that avenue of justice. And it really does take the most supreme prosecutorial effort to achieve a conviction of first degree murder.

In the USA the story given by the prosecutors must match the crime evidence gathered in the exhibits. In Canada and other countries the jury can come up with a guilty verdict based on the story of the evidence whether or not that story is at variance with the prosecutorial version. In other words in the US O.J. Simpson was rightfully found innocent because the story advanced by the prosecutors was not believed.

The level of evidence and story consistency is maximum in a 1st degree murder trial. In Canada and other British Commonwealth jury trials the evidence remains supreme. In those countries juries would have had the liberty to convict OJ Simpson on the evidence.

Further in those jurisdictions the jury decisions can be appealed by either the defence or the crown or prosecutors. Additionally in those jurisdictions with the British heritage the prosecutors do not need a dead body to proceed with murder charges.

At this point it should be pointed out that those countries do not have capital punishment and do now compensate people for wrongful convictions. In the US the properly run murder conviction process maintains a very high degree or bar of proof and story because the penalty of conviction is so draconian.

So in conclusion and appropriately, the hardest form of murder to prove is always 1st degree murder. And circumstantial 1st degree murder is almost impossible to prove in the United States system.

Answer 3

I heard of a murder where a woman (smoker) went to bed one night (as you do), with her cigarette still lit. The murderer broke in, but no glass was broken, and smothered her so it looked like the cigarette smoke had killed her. It took them a long time to find this out, and it is still just a hypothesis, and I think they're still looking for the killer, after, what, 3-5 years?

Anyway, other murders like that could be where there's no body (as many people are saying), and if the murderer was a complete stranger to the victim, so the murderer would not seem to have a motive, and would be quite hard to prove...

Answer 4

Your best bet is to use a non-organic toxin that doesn't get routinely tested for at a post-mortem - some kind of heavy metal like palladium - or a compound that induces a secondary reaction that becomes the cause of death. For example, a large dose of digitalin would cause a heart seizure and would be masked by further medical injections such as adrenaline. The chances are the post mortem would list a heart attack as cause of death because it would be easy and obvious!

If you wanted to be doubly sure, you could always dissolve the body in a strong alkali solution - don't use acid; it leaves residual dna traces and doesn't work effectively on teeth. Washing the resultant sludge down the drain followed by several large doses of drain cleaner will make it virtually impossible to detect anything untoward has happened.

And before you ask, yes - I've missed out a couple of crucial steps to aviod detection 'cos I'm not having some div try it!

Answer 5

I think the hardest to prove is not a type of murder but rather one without much evidence to prove the case. A specific type if anything would be serial killings just because sometimes to killer has no connection to the victim.

Answer 6

If you had an identical twin, you could commit a murder and it would be impossible for the forensics team to prove which of you did it because your DNA would be identical. And if your twin was in the pub at the time, that would be your alibi too, because as you are identical the other customers in the pub could not swear which of you they had seen there.

Well that's my theory anyway. I dont actually know any identical twins who've tried it.

Answer 7

A single random murder. Most murders involve people who know each other. That's where the cops start looking. Serial killers have identifiable patterns.

Why do you ask?

Answer 8

I don't know about "form" but the most difficult murder weapon to prove is the ice cicle. It melts into the wound and leaves absolutely no murder weapon behind. I hope you aren't planning on killing anyone?

Answer 9

Murder during war.
or
Any kind of murder without evidences.

Answer 10

i think its the kind where the person kills the victim as a form of self defense. How are they gonna prove it's self defense?
My aunt was killed and proving the murder guilty was a sinch. He pled guitly and the evidence was everywhere.

Answer 11

Murder in the first degree with no body. You have to prove that the accused intended to kill the victim, that the accused planned in advance to kill the victim, and that he did in fact kill the victim, and that the victim is in fact dead, even though there is no body.