by the Supreme Court of Justice's Bureau of Judge Trainees

“ THE FIRST QUESTION the Defendant raised through his final appeal was whether or not he murdered the Deceased torturously or cruelly, the Supreme Court entertained an opinion that: For a gun is destructively powerful by nature, it may be used to cause lethal danger to either human beings or animals. The facts that the Defendant shot the Deceased’s head―one of the most essential parts of the body―and that the bullet shot came into her left temple and went out of her right temple, indicated the Defendant’s intent to have her died immediately. ”

“ Since the offence of premeditated and torturous or cruel murder and the offence of shooting gun in town without justifiable grounds were committed simultaneously, being one act subject to several punishments, the Defendant could only be punished by the heaviest one only. He was thereby sentenced to capital punishment solely, on account of the offence of premeditated and torturous or cruel murder. Nonetheless, by virtue of the CC, § 78 along with § 52 (1) , the capital punishment could be reduced by one third to imprisonment for life. ”

“ Although the Defendant asserted he possessed a computer and a car, the Supreme Court considered computers and cars are owned by the general public, and both things are not valuable to the extent that the Defendant needed to possess any weapon for protecting them as argued. ”