Someone please explain how this is a just and reasonable jail sentence?

Discussion in 'General Chat' started by rousetafarian, Feb 22, 2014.

  1. rousetafarian

    rousetafarian
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2007
    Messages:
    23,652
    Products Owned:
    1
    Products Wanted:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    NW
    Ratings:
    +15,597
  2. Bill Hicks

    Bill Hicks
    Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2004
    Messages:
    7,121
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Location:
    London, England.
    Ratings:
    +1,590
    You'll get more for nicking a Porsche.
    Disgraceful
     
  3. Trollslayer

    Trollslayer
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2007
    Messages:
    26,043
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    Poole
    Ratings:
    +10,905
    And drugs are no excuse (yes, alcohol is a drug).
     
  4. NorvernRob

    NorvernRob
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2006
    Messages:
    4,332
    Products Owned:
    1
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    Sheffield
    Ratings:
    +3,325
    Too many judges are completely out of touch with reality.

    To put this sentence into perspective, when I was on jury service I sat in for two cases. One was a guy who conned his way into an old couples home pretending to use the phone and stole £30. He had previous convictions for theft and got 5 years in prison.

    The other was a guy done for dealing heroin in the street, he was caught with a small amount in his possession. It was a first offence and he got 3 years.

    How can either of those crimes even compare to purposely attacking someone and killing them? It's unbelievable. I don't care if the kid was 16 or 46, he should do 10 years absolute minimum.
     
  5. fluxo

    fluxo
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2011
    Messages:
    7,185
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    163
    Ratings:
    +2,351
    The sentences seem completely random sometimes.
     
  6. Penski

    Penski
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2007
    Messages:
    281
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings:
    +73
    This sentence is a disgrace - what kind of message is the idiot judge sending out?
     
  7. twoeyedbob

    twoeyedbob
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2011
    Messages:
    879
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    66
    Location:
    ayrshire
    Ratings:
    +318
    In no way am i agreeing with this sentence....i'm trying to understand it.
    Is it not the case that people have to be trialed for the crime as opposed to the outcome ..?
    99 times out of 100 the victim wouldnt have died
    If he'd shot him at point blank would the judge have had more options..
     
  8. blue max

    blue max
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2006
    Messages:
    12,946
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    London
    Ratings:
    +4,315
    I guess it is down to how much the actual outcome is due to the crime as twoeyed says. The judges don't put a finger in the air, they have guidelines to follow. What the young lad did was awful, but I am sure he didn't think he would kill anyone. He was sentenced based on the random nature of what he did. There was no intent to kill.
    We would all judge it more harshly knowing the outcome.
    The crime has to slot in beteen all the other terrible crimes and find it's rightful place. As bad as it was, there are worse crimes which deserver greater punishments.
     
  9. NorvernRob

    NorvernRob
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2006
    Messages:
    4,332
    Products Owned:
    1
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    Sheffield
    Ratings:
    +3,325
    But he did fully intend to hurt the guy, otherwise he wouldn't have attacked him. If you choose to attack someone, then you should take full responsibility for what happens as a direct result of your actions.

    It wasn't a pub brawl between two meatheads, it was an unprovoked attack from behind on a defenceless person.

    'I didn't mean to kill him' when you've attacked someone from behind then bragged that you knocked them out doesn't wash with me, and neither does a 3 year sentence for the heartache and grief caused by taking someone away from their family.
     
  10. blue max

    blue max
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2006
    Messages:
    12,946
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    London
    Ratings:
    +4,315
    Hey Rob, totally agree with you mate. I'm not defending the guy at all. But I'm trying to see it through the eyes of the law. We have to have a framework and events have to fit within that framework.

    The outcome was dreadful and will have effected a lot of people and of course, all our sympathies lie with the relatives. Even the guy himself will have brought misery to his own family.

    There are no winners at all in all of this.

    Only time will tell if he comes out of this a changed person. We can only hope so as it is just another life ruined to add to the count. Whether he will be able to live with himself is another matter.

    Arguably there is some merit in a public flogging. Cheap, quick, humiliating and public. Obviously not for murder, but assault perhaps.

    But just like drink driving, people only think of the moment and not the result. The foolishness of youth.

    At the end of they day, he punched someone. Unless you give life to anyone that punches someone else, the crime is the same despite the outcome. I'm sure he would have got less if the victim had only suffered a black eye, so to some extent he has got more than he deserved.
     
  11. twoeyedbob

    twoeyedbob
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2011
    Messages:
    879
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    66
    Location:
    ayrshire
    Ratings:
    +318
    It's the intent that is taken into account...
    I suspect that at no point did he intend to kill the guy..as i said if he shot him or even stabbed him then he would have been sentenced differently..
    ..i'd suggest this has been trialed like a serious version of happy slapping..

    I'll re-iterate that i think its appalling and if it was my dad i'd want life..just trying to understand the judges thinking
     
  12. BName

    BName
    Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2006
    Messages:
    11,253
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Location:
    Staffordshire, uk
    Ratings:
    +905
    I hope he gets seen to when he gets out.
     
  13. pandemic

    pandemic
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2008
    Messages:
    4,580
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Ratings:
    +1,167
    Call me a cynic, but it's all about money, right? By pleading guilty, there's costly no trial and hence a reduced sentence. I think three years is the minimum for manslaughter, if he were found guilty by trial the sentencing would be closer to 10 years. His age was probably a factor, being 16 when the crime was committed.
    Sentencing for manslaughter for a typical adult depends on the level of provocation, prior to the attack; in this case there was none and should result in a 10 year to life sentence.
     
  14. fluxo

    fluxo
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2011
    Messages:
    7,185
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    163
    Ratings:
    +2,351
    Are you encouraging an illegal violent act?
     
  15. rousetafarian

    rousetafarian
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2007
    Messages:
    23,652
    Products Owned:
    1
    Products Wanted:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    NW
    Ratings:
    +15,597
    If I was the deceased's son, then at the 'risk' of a short custodial sentence I would be inclined to seek retribution
     
  16. fluxo

    fluxo
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2011
    Messages:
    7,185
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    163
    Ratings:
    +2,351
    Then you would be no better than a common criminal.
     
  17. twoeyedbob

    twoeyedbob
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2011
    Messages:
    879
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    66
    Location:
    ayrshire
    Ratings:
    +318
    :rolleyes:
     
  18. BName

    BName
    Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2006
    Messages:
    11,253
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Location:
    Staffordshire, uk
    Ratings:
    +905
    No i meant he should be rehoused and given a new id and given praise for what he did lol.;) not
     
  19. fluxo

    fluxo
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2011
    Messages:
    7,185
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    163
    Ratings:
    +2,351
    You're entitled to your opinion, but personally I think it's quite immature to advocate violence.

    If a relative of mine had been murdered, I would be distraught. I would not, however, think that would give me any justification to be violent myself. Where would we be if any person who felt aggrieved went about lashing out at people?
     

Share This Page

Loading...