Talk:Inchoate offense

Bearian 00:29, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Citation needed citation needed CITATION NEEDED FETISHIST

Citations are not needed, grow up —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.84.224.36 (talk) 01:59, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Far too much of this is tagged; it's unaesthetic as well as entirely unnecesary. That "offense" is an alternative spelling for "offence" is probably not something that needs a citation. 68.84.224.36 (talk) 19:38, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

But a lot of it is - e.g. murder's normal mens rea in England is death or GBH, but for an attempt it can only be an intention to kill (R v Whybrow). Citations are needed here as a lot of this is either assumption or jurisdiction-specific. -- Graius (talk) 14:26, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Burglary

Would this be considered in this category? Bearian 16:37, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Not even close 68.84.224.36 (talk) 09:58, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Let me explain - burglary doesn't even remotely fit into the definition. Burglary and, for example, felony murder are not inchoate offenses. Anyone who thought that would utterly misunderstand what an inchoate offense is. I am sorry I was not so helpfully descriptive of why burglary isn't even close to an inchoate offense before; that has been corrected now, so no one will fall into such an awful error in the future. 68.84.224.36 (talk) 19:37, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Linguistics

Currently the article includes a section on "linguistics" with several subsections, discussing the grammatical forms used to describe inchoate offenses, and the section is tagged with a request for expansion. I am, instead, deleting it altogether. Discussion of cognate accusatives and the imperative "case" [sic] contributes nothing to an article about law. --208.76.104.133 (talk) 06:55, 9 February 2009 (UTC)