Scaife ATLAS

CTS Library / The Third Tetralogy: Prosecution for Murder Of One Who Pleads That He Was Acting in Self-Defence

The Third Tetralogy: Prosecution for Murder Of One Who Pleads That He Was Acting in Self-Defence (4.4-4.7)

urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0028.tlg004.perseus-eng2:4.4-4.7
Refs {'start': {'reference': '4.4', 'human_reference': 'Tetralogy 4 Section 4'}, 'end': {'reference': '4.7', 'human_reference': 'Tetralogy 4 Section 7'}}
Ancestors [{'reference': '4'}]
Children []
prev
plain textXML
next

Nor again is the intention to kill to be attributed to the accused rather than to his accuser. If it had been the case that, whereas he who struck the first blow had meant not to kill, but to strike, he who was defending himself had meant to kill, then it would have been this last who was guilty of the intention to kill. As it was, he who was defending himself likewise intended to strike, not to kill; but he committed an error, and struck where he did not mean to strike.

He was thus admittedly the wilful author of the blow; how can he have killed willfully,when he struck otherwise than he intended?

Further, it is with the aggressor rather than with him who was defending himself that the responsibility for the error itself rests. The one was seeking to retaliate for the blows which he was receiving, when he committed his error: he was being forced to act by his attacker; whereas with the other, it was his own lack of self-control which caused him to give and receive the blows which he did: and so, since he is responsible both for his own error and for his victims, he deserves the name of murderer.

Again, his defense was not more vigorous than the attack made upon him, but much less so: as I will show. The one was truculent, drunken, and violent; he took the offensive throughout, and was never on the defensive at all. The other was seeking to avoid blows and repel him; the blows which he received, he received from no choice of his own and the blows which he gave were given in defense of himself against the aggressor, and much less vigorously than that aggressor deserved, because his only object was to avoid the hurt which was being done to him; he did not take the offensive at all.

Even supposing that his defense was more vigorous than the attack made upon him, because there was more vigor in his hands, you cannot justly condemn him. Heavy penalties are invariably provided for the aggressor: whereas no penalty is ever prescribed for him who defends himself.

Tokens

Nor 1 w 3
again 1 w 8
is 1 w 10
the 1 w 13
intention 1 w 22
to 1 w 24
kill 1 w 28
to 2 w 30
be 1 w 32
attributed 1 w 42
to 3 w 44
the 2 w 47
accused 1 w 54
rather 1 w 60
than 1 w 64
to 4 w 66
his 1 w 69
accuser 1 w 76
If 1 w 79
it 1 w 81
had 1 w 84
been 1 w 88
the 4 w 91
case 1 w 95
that 1 w 99
whereas 1 w 107
he 6 w 109
who 1 w 112
struck 1 w 118
the 5 w 121
first 1 w 126
blow 1 w 130
had 2 w 133
meant 1 w 138
not 1 w 141
to 5 w 143
kill 2 w 147
but 2 w 151
to 6 w 153
strike 1 w 159
he 8 w 162
who 2 w 165
was 1 w 168
defending 1 w 177
himself 1 w 184
had 3 w 187
meant 2 w 192
to 7 w 194
kill 3 w 198
then 1 w 203
it 2 w 205
would 1 w 210
have 1 w 214
been 2 w 218
this 1 w 222
last 1 w 226
who 3 w 229
was 2 w 232
guilty 1 w 238
of 1 w 240
the 7 w 243
intention 2 w 252
to 8 w 254
kill 4 w 258
As 1 w 261
it 3 w 263
was 3 w 266
he 11 w 269
who 4 w 272
was 4 w 275
defending 2 w 284
himself 2 w 291
likewise 1 w 299
intended 1 w 307
to 9 w 309
strike 2 w 315
not 2 w 319
to 10 w 321
kill 5 w 325
but 3 w 329
he 12 w 331
committed 1 w 340
an 4 w 342
error 1 w 347
and 1 w 351
struck 2 w 357
where 2 w 362
he 14 w 364
did 1 w 367
not 3 w 370
mean 3 w 374
to 11 w 376
strike 3 w 382
He 1 w 385
was 5 w 388
thus 1 w 392
admittedly 1 w 402
the 8 w 405
wilful 1 w 411
author 1 w 417
of 2 w 419
the 9 w 422
blow 2 w 426
how 1 w 430
can 1 w 433
he 17 w 435
have 2 w 439
killed 1 w 445
willfully 1 w 454
when 1 w 459
he 19 w 461
struck 3 w 467
otherwise 1 w 476
than 2 w 480
he 21 w 482
intended 2 w 490
Further 1 w 498
it 6 w 501
is 6 w 503
with 1 w 507
the 12 w 510
aggressor 1 w 519
rather 2 w 525
than 3 w 529
with 2 w 533
him 3 w 536
who 5 w 539
was 6 w 542
defending 3 w 551
himself 3 w 558
that 2 w 562
the 14 w 565
responsibility 1 w 579
for 1 w 582
the 15 w 585
error 2 w 590
itself 1 w 596
rests 1 w 601
The 1 w 605
one 1 w 608
was 7 w 611
seeking 1 w 618
to 12 w 620
retaliate 1 w 629
for 2 w 632
the 16 w 635
blows 1 w 640
which 1 w 645
he 29 w 647
was 8 w 650
receiving 1 w 659
when 2 w 664
he 31 w 666
committed 2 w 675
his 3 w 678
error 3 w 683
he 32 w 686
was 9 w 689
being 1 w 694
forced 1 w 700
to 13 w 702
act 1 w 705
by 1 w 707
his 4 w 710
attacker 1 w 718
whereas 2 w 726
with 3 w 730
the 17 w 733
other 2 w 738
it 13 w 741
was 10 w 744
his 5 w 747
own 1 w 750
lack 1 w 754
of 3 w 756
self-control 1 w 768
which 2 w 773
caused 1 w 779
him 5 w 782
to 14 w 784
give 1 w 788
and 2 w 791
receive 1 w 798
the 19 w 801
blows 2 w 806
which 3 w 811
he 37 w 813
did 2 w 816
and 3 w 820
so 2 w 822
since 1 w 828
he 38 w 830
is 10 w 832
responsible 1 w 843
both 1 w 847
for 4 w 850
his 6 w 853
own 2 w 856
error 4 w 861
and 4 w 864
for 5 w 867
his 7 w 870
victim 1 w 876
s 57 w 878
he 39 w 881
deserves 1 w 889
the 20 w 892
name 1 w 896
of 4 w 898
murderer 1 w 906
Again 1 w 912
his 8 w 916
defense 1 w 923
was 11 w 926
not 4 w 929
more 1 w 933
vigorous 1 w 941
than 4 w 945
the 21 w 948
attack 2 w 954
made 1 w 958
upon 1 w 962
him 6 w 965
but 4 w 969
much 1 w 973
less 1 w 977
so 3 w 979
as 16 w 982
I 2 w 983
will 2 w 987
show 1 w 991
The 2 w 995
one 2 w 998
was 12 w 1001
truculent 1 w 1010
drunken 1 w 1018
and 5 w 1022
violent 1 w 1029
he 43 w 1032
took 1 w 1036
the 22 w 1039
offensive 1 w 1048
throughout 1 w 1058
and 6 w 1062
was 13 w 1065
never 1 w 1070
on 9 w 1072
the 23 w 1075
defensive 1 w 1084
at 9 w 1086
all 1 w 1089
The 3 w 1093
other 3 w 1098
was 14 w 1101
seeking 2 w 1108
to 16 w 1110
avoid 1 w 1115
blows 3 w 1120
and 7 w 1123
repel 1 w 1128
him 7 w 1131
the 25 w 1135
blows 4 w 1140
which 4 w 1145
he 49 w 1147
received 1 w 1155
he 50 w 1158
received 2 w 1166
from 1 w 1170
no 5 w 1172
choice 1 w 1178
of 6 w 1180
his 9 w 1183
own 3 w 1186
and 8 w 1189
the 26 w 1192
blows 5 w 1197
which 5 w 1202
he 52 w 1204
gave 1 w 1208
were 1 w 1212
given 1 w 1217
in 15 w 1219
defense 2 w 1226
of 7 w 1228
himself 4 w 1235
against 1 w 1242
the 27 w 1245
aggressor 2 w 1254
and 9 w 1258
much 2 w 1262
less 2 w 1266
vigorously 1 w 1276
than 5 w 1280
that 3 w 1284
aggressor 3 w 1293
deserved 1 w 1301
because 1 w 1309
his 10 w 1312
only 1 w 1316
object 1 w 1322
was 15 w 1325
to 17 w 1327
avoid 2 w 1332
the 28 w 1335
hurt 1 w 1339
which 6 w 1344
was 16 w 1347
being 2 w 1352
done 1 w 1356
to 18 w 1358
him 9 w 1361
he 55 w 1364
did 3 w 1367
not 5 w 1370
take 1 w 1374
the 29 w 1377
offensive 2 w 1386
at 11 w 1388
all 2 w 1391
Even 1 w 1396
supposing 1 w 1405
that 4 w 1409
his 11 w 1412
defense 3 w 1419
was 17 w 1422
more 2 w 1426
vigorous 3 w 1434
than 6 w 1438
the 30 w 1441
attack 3 w 1447
made 2 w 1451
upon 2 w 1455
him 10 w 1458
because 2 w 1466
there 1 w 1471
was 18 w 1474
more 3 w 1478
vigor 4 w 1483
in 19 w 1485
his 12 w 1488
hands 1 w 1493
you 1 w 1497
cannot 1 w 1503
justly 1 w 1509
condemn 1 w 1516
him 11 w 1519
Heavy 1 w 1525
penalties 1 w 1534
are 1 w 1537
invariably 1 w 1547
provided 1 w 1555
for 6 w 1558
the 32 w 1561
aggressor 4 w 1570
whereas 3 w 1578
no 8 w 1580
penalty 1 w 1587
is 18 w 1589
ever 2 w 1593
prescribed 1 w 1603
for 7 w 1606
him 12 w 1609
who 6 w 1612
defends 1 w 1619
himself 5 w 1626