Shrimpsvoices

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/lanc ... 716096.stm

Four years??? Walk up to someone and beat them up in a totally unprovoked attack. The guy dies as a result of a blow to the head. Firstly, how is that not 'murder'? Secondly, how is a life only worth four years (out after two for 'good behaviour')? If he keeps his nose clean, he'll be walking the streets again in 21 months time! FFS, people have mobile phone contracts that are longer than that.

Agree that this is hard to believe. Manslaughter is unintentional killing and is always treated lightly in this country.

I guess the lad said he only intended to maim the older guy, but for me that should make no difference. Is a drunken driver who kills someone any less guilty?

Utterly disgusting. I just hope the family of the dead guy put out a contract on the despicable scumbag. If that happened to anyone in my family I wouldn't rest till a full and fair retribution of equal proportion had been meted out. Bring back hanging for maggots like this.

durianmuncher wrote:Utterly disgusting. I just hope the family of the dead guy put out a contract on the despicable scumbag. If that happened to anyone in my family I wouldn't rest till a full and fair retribution of equal proportion had been meted out. Bring back hanging for maggots like this.

Sorry to say but reactions like yours only make the problems in our society worse

Age 19 + therefore probably in Lancaster Farms and being spoiled by Social Services because they don't half go soft on these so called 'kids' these days (as in under 21yrs )

If it comes to light who the coward was who attacked a young girl cadet poppy seller at the weekend he will have to spend a good time hiding from blokes like me. Can you beleive it

Story will be in the Visitor this week.

sgt major wrote:If it comes to light who the coward was who attacked a young girl cadet poppy seller at the weekend he will have to spend a good time hiding from blokes like me. Can you beleive it

Story will be in the Visitor this week.

Thats Disgusting! Where did this happen? If you know?

Apparently it was outside Greenwoods - there must have been others about that saw it.

Like I said, it's the front page story in the Visitor this week.

Aal wrote:
Sorry to say but reactions like yours only make the problems in our society worse

Sorry to say that for specimens like this, the law is wholly inadequate. If there was a fitting punishment legally on offer, there wouldn't be reactions like mine. I stand by my earlier comment.

if you get into a fight with someone (for now let's assume provoked) punch them and for some freakish reason (they fall and bang their head, say) they die, would you be culpable for murder? of course not. would you be scum? no. you'd be a prat. and you'd be responsible for someone's life and you should get punished, but quite clearly not for murder.

now this was an unprovoked attack which makes it worse, of course. but there was presumably no evidence that this guy meant to kill the victim, there was no premeditation. he was a nutter for sure, but 4 years for an assault that ended up killing someone is quite likely the maximum sentance the court could impose.

the courts did their job, like it or not, i'd rather them mete out justice than internet messageboards!

wonder shrimp wrote:now this was an unprovoked attack which makes it worse, of course. but there was presumably no evidence that this guy meant to kill the victim, there was no premeditation. he was a nutter for sure, but 4 years for an assault that ended up killing someone is quite likely the maximum sentance the court could impose.

the courts did their job, like it or not, i'd rather them mete out justice than internet message boards!

Depends I guess on how much or little you value a life. If it was your father/brother/friend who was quietly minding their business when some thug beat them up and killed them, then if you think two years locked up is appropriate, then you are right, the courts did their job. Personally, I think if you beat a stranger around the head then there is a high possibility that you will cause them a serious injury or kill them. I have no problem with the thug having to live with the consequences of their actions by losing their liberty for a very long time.

You are right, I would rather the courts dispense justice, not internet forums. But the courts are there to represent justice for us all. If the courts value my life or your life, as being worth two years, then the courts are wrong.

If a drunk driver causes a death, they will get more than four years. "Intent" to "kill" doesn't matter in that instance, it's the outcome that makes the difference.

durianmuncher wrote:

Aal wrote:
Sorry to say but reactions like yours only make the problems in our society worse

Sorry to say that for specimens like this, the law is wholly inadequate. If there was a fitting punishment legally on offer, there wouldn't be reactions like mine. I stand by my earlier comment.

The law is adequate, the punishment given is inadequate. he could've got far more than this. In fact, he could've got life. So you reactions is as disproportionate as the two years he recieved (post-remission).
So, going back to your comment "if there was a fitting punishment legally on offer", I am assuming you simply mean revenge (death) as opposed to justice (punishment given on behalf of society)? Your comments are purely opinion, do you think the family would feel any better if they had him killed? Actually, don't answer that because I already know you'll say yes. Will this unfortunate man be miraculously brought back to life? Will his family share more days with him? No.
Now, go with the age old reason for capital punishment to stay consigned to history; What if we got the wrong one? What if the wrong lad was put to death (by one means or another)? What if he wass your brother and you knew him to be not guilty but he was still killed. the what?

wijit wrote:The law is adequate, the punishment given is inadequate. he could've got far more than this. In fact, he could've got life. So you reactions is as disproportionate as the two years he recieved (post-remission).
So, going back to your comment "if there was a fitting punishment legally on offer", I am assuming you simply mean revenge (death) as opposed to justice (punishment given on behalf of society)? Your comments are purely opinion, do you think the family would feel any better if they had him killed? Actually, don't answer that because I already know you'll say yes. Will this unfortunate man be miraculously brought back to life? Will his family share more days with him? No.
Now, go with the age old reason for capital punishment to stay consigned to history; What if we got the wrong one? What if the wrong lad was put to death (by one means or another)? What if he was your brother and you knew him to be not guilty but he was still killed. the what?

Accepting that the comment above wasn't aimed at me, I am totally against capital punishment in any situation. I do believe that "life" should in many instances mean the rest of your natural life. I also believe that in this instance, had the tariff been twenty years it would have been acceptable. Indeed, I wouldn't have gone off on a Daily Mail style rant in the first place!

We need to find some uncommon ground Keith! I can't be agreeing with you this often!

Thanks I agree with all Wijit is saying and I agree that you feel differently if you are directly involved.

I'll admit that I wanted to batter senseless the low life who stole my motor bike 20 years ago but I now recognise that that would not have solved anything.

This country does not need vigilantes but it does need suitable punishments for criminals.

Let me just climb onto my high horse again....

I also can't understand why we have concurrent sentences. How can it be that you commit 5 crimes, get 5 years for each and yet be free after 2 and a half?

Yeh 5x5 is 25 so out in 12 would be fairer!