A man named William Lewis, 56, was caught on CCTV committing a brutal murder in Hamilton. He pleaded guilty to charges of murder and attempted murder at the High Court in Glasgow. The incident occurred when Lewis stabbed William Copeland, 36, shortly after they appeared to embrace. During the attack on October 21, 2022, Lewis also turned his knife on Copeland's father, Thomas, who is wheelchair-bound.

Before the stabbing, there had been a brief argument between Lewis and Copeland's group. Witnesses reported that moments before the attack, Copeland seemed happy as he shook hands and hugged both Lewis and another man. However, within seconds, Lewis became aggressive and pulled out a purple-handled knife.

The court heard that graphic footage of the attack showed Lewis stabbing Copeland multiple times while he was on the ground. He also stabbed Thomas in the chest before fleeing with the weapon hidden in his pocket. Despite attempts by witnesses to help him with CPR until paramedics arrived, Copeland did not survive his injuries from eight stab wounds.

Thomas was taken to the hospital for emergency surgery but later recovered physically; however, he experienced significant emotional trauma from witnessing his son's murder. The case has deeply affected their family as they mourn their loss. William's sister expressed how devastating it has been for them without him.

Lewis has previous convictions related to drugs and remains in custody while awaiting sentencing scheduled for September.

Original article

This article primarily serves as a news report on a tragic incident and the subsequent legal proceedings. It does not provide any actionable information that readers can directly apply to their lives. There are no clear steps, safety guidelines, or instructions mentioned that could benefit the audience.

Educational depth is also lacking. While the article provides some basic facts and details about the murder and the court case, it does not delve into the why or how of the incident. It fails to explore the deeper causes, motivations, or systems at play that could offer a more comprehensive understanding of such crimes.

In terms of personal relevance, the article may resonate with readers who have experienced similar tragedies or have concerns about public safety. However, for most readers, it may not directly impact their daily lives or long-term plans. It does not offer any guidance on how to prevent or deal with such situations, nor does it provide any legal or psychological insights that could be practically applied.

The public service function of the article is limited. It does not provide any official warnings, emergency contacts, or resources that could aid the public in similar situations. Instead, it merely reports on an incident that has already occurred, without offering any proactive measures or tools for prevention or support.

The practicality of the advice is not applicable here, as the article does not provide any advice or steps to follow.

In terms of long-term impact, the article does not offer any lasting value or strategies for readers to improve their lives or the world around them. It is a snapshot of a tragic event and its legal aftermath, without any suggestions for positive change or long-term planning.

Emotionally, the article may evoke strong feelings of sadness, anger, or fear in readers. However, it does not provide any psychological support or guidance on how to process such emotions or deal with similar traumatic events.

The language used in the article is not clickbait-y or sensationalized. It reports the facts in a straightforward manner, without using dramatic or exaggerated language to attract attention.

The article misses an opportunity to educate readers on crime prevention, legal processes, or psychological support for victims and their families. It could have included links to relevant support groups, legal resources, or mental health services. Additionally, providing more context on the criminal justice system and its processes could have added depth and practical value to the article.

In summary, while the article informs readers about a tragic event and its legal proceedings, it does not offer any actionable steps, educational depth, or practical advice that readers can use to improve their lives or navigate similar situations. It primarily serves an informative purpose, without providing the tools or guidance that could empower readers to take action or make informed decisions.

The brutal murder described in the text is a tragic breach of the fundamental bonds that hold families and communities together. It undermines the very essence of kinship, which is to protect and nurture life, especially the most vulnerable members of society: children and elders.

This incident highlights a severe breakdown of trust and responsibility within the community. The act of murder, especially one so violent and premeditated, shatters the sense of safety and security that families and neighbors rely on. It erodes the fabric of community life, making people feel vulnerable and afraid, thus hindering the natural duties of parents and kin to raise children in a peaceful and nurturing environment.

The impact on the Copeland family is devastating. The loss of William Copeland, a young man with his whole life ahead of him, leaves a gaping hole in his family's future. His sister's expression of grief underscores the profound impact of such a loss on the continuity of the family line. The emotional trauma experienced by Thomas Copeland, who witnessed his son's murder, further emphasizes the long-lasting and intergenerational effects of such violence.

The fact that the perpetrator, William Lewis, has a history of drug-related convictions and is awaiting sentencing, suggests a pattern of behavior that neglects personal responsibility and the duties owed to the community. His actions have not only taken a life but have also inflicted deep emotional wounds on multiple families, potentially affecting their ability to care for and nurture future generations.

If such behaviors and attitudes towards violence and personal responsibility are left unchecked, they will erode the very foundations of community life. Over time, this could lead to a breakdown of social order, increased fear and mistrust, and a decline in the birth rate as families feel less secure and less inclined to bring children into such an environment.

The consequences of such a shift are dire. Without strong, cohesive families and communities, the survival of the people is at risk. The land, which relies on the stewardship of these families, will suffer, and the cycle of life and continuity will be disrupted. It is essential that personal responsibility and local accountability are emphasized, and that restitution is made where possible, to restore trust and rebuild the bonds that keep families and communities strong.

The survival of the people depends on the daily deeds of protection, care, and responsibility, not merely on identity or feelings. It is through these actions that the land is cared for, the vulnerable are defended, and the continuity of the clan is ensured.

The text uses strong words like "brutal" and "graphic" to describe the murder, which can make readers feel more strongly about the crime. These words push feelings and might make people think worse of the murderer.

"The court heard that graphic footage of the attack showed Lewis stabbing Copeland multiple times while he was on the ground."

This sentence uses the word "graphic" to describe the footage, which can make readers imagine the violence more vividly and feel more upset.

The text evokes a range of emotions, primarily centered around the tragic and violent incident described. The emotions are strong and serve to highlight the impact of the murder on the victims, their family, and those who witnessed the event.

Sadness is a dominant emotion throughout the text. It is first introduced when describing the murder of William Copeland, with the mention of his sister's expression of devastation and the family's mourning. This sadness deepens as the text reveals the physical and emotional trauma experienced by Thomas, Copeland's father, who witnessed his son's murder. The emotion of sadness here serves to evoke sympathy from the reader, creating a sense of shared grief and an understanding of the profound loss suffered by the family.

Fear is another emotion that emerges, particularly in the description of the attack. The witnesses' report of Copeland's happiness moments before the stabbing, followed by Lewis' sudden aggression, creates a sense of foreboding and fear. This emotion is heightened by the graphic description of the stabbing, with Lewis' aggressive actions and the mention of the purple-handled knife adding to the sense of danger and fear. The purpose of this emotion is to emphasize the brutality and suddenness of the attack, creating a sense of shock and unease.

Anger is also present, directed towards Lewis, who is described as becoming aggressive and pulling out a knife. The text mentions his previous convictions related to drugs, which may further fuel the reader's anger towards him. This emotion is likely intended to create a sense of moral outrage and to position Lewis as the clear antagonist in the story.

The writer uses emotional language and vivid descriptions to create a powerful impact. For instance, the mention of "graphic footage" of the attack and the detail of Lewis' knife being "purple-handled" adds a sensory element that heightens the emotional response. The repetition of the name "William" when referring to the victim also personalizes the story, making it more relatable and emotionally charged.

By using these emotional tools, the writer aims to persuade the reader to feel a deep connection to the victims and their family, to understand the severity of the crime, and to perhaps even advocate for a harsh sentence for Lewis. The emotional language and storytelling techniques create a narrative that is compelling and memorable, ensuring that the reader is engaged and affected by the story.