harvey19 Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 he might have never want to go to the states. but you're right, which is why i think they went a little too far. that said, what exactly did they charge him with? what did they convict him with in the end? No matter what the sentence he would still have a criminal record, and have to suffer the consequences. I think he was charged with a public order offence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaimani Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 His sentence most probably reflects the fact that it was a premeditated action. He took the fire extinguisher with the intention of commiting a criminal act with it. a criminal act, yes. damage of property, maybe, but not to kill anyone. if he had actually killed someone, and he had a good lawyer the lawyer would probably have managed to show that his intention wasn't to kill and he might have gotten the same amount of time. as we know, some people have walked from manslaughter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaimani Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 No matter what the sentence he would still have a criminal record, and have to suffer the consequences. I think he was charged with a public order offence. public order offense then got that long?? that's bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spindrift Posted January 11, 2011 Author Share Posted January 11, 2011 If it is true, the statistics will show more casualties and deaths caused by drivers using mobile phones than drink drivers. . No it won't, for the reason in my post you've just quoted, the disparity in rates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harvey19 Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 a criminal act, yes. damage of property, maybe, but not to kill anyone. if he had actually killed someone, and he had a good lawyer the lawyer would probably have managed to show that his intention wasn't to kill and he might have gotten the same amount of time. as we know, some people have walked from manslaughter. It is the premeditation and recklessness of his action and possible consequences of it that will have decided his sentence most probably. Imagine this scenario, Police....Why did you take the fire extinguisher onto the roof. Suspect...Not sure. Police....Did you throw the fire extinguisher off the roof to the ground below where there was a crowd of people ? Suspect... Yes. Police......What do you think the result would have been if the fire extinguisher had hit one of those people below on the head? Suspect...Killed them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llamatron Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Every day I see drivers on mobiles, running red lights, driving on the pavement or speeding. 80% of drivers admit speeding, a fifth of drivers admit using a mobile whilst driving. Lawlessness on the roads is rife. where the hell do you live to see this behaviour on the roads every day. As a cyclist I don't see that many irresponsible road users. Its probably 1-2 incidents a week! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spindrift Posted January 11, 2011 Author Share Posted January 11, 2011 where the hell do you live to see this behaviour on the roads every day. As a cyclist I don't see that many irresponsible road users. Its probably 1-2 incidents a week! East London. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llamatron Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 East London. ah that explains it, when you leave london people drive more sensibly though! I wouldn't dare driving in london and avoid letting other people drive me round there because its mental Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mj.scuba Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 No it won't, for the reason in my post you've just quoted, the disparity in rates. Statistics and data, give the real picture, not just reasearch and theory. If mobile phone usage was more dangerous than drink driving, there would be far more many casualties and deaths casued by drivers using their mobile phones than drink drivers. I can't evidence this, but drink driving has been taboo for a long time, where as mobile phones and their banning are a more recent phenomenon, so I'd guess that instances of driving whilst using a mobile phone are much higher than drink driving. I see drivers everyday using their mobile, but I don't think I see as many drunk drivers everyday. Anecdotal I know, but this should also point to higher casualty and fatality stats caused by mobile phone usage than drink driving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metalman Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 I wonder if spindrift would have posted this thread if the chap concerned had been on an EDL rally, say, rather than a left-wing anti-government demo. I suspect not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.