Cyclone Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 Hurrah. I understand about the meaning to kill bit but the aggression was there or he wouldn't have hit unless it was self defence. I kill someone whilst driving slightly over the limit or making a phonecall when driving and killed someone you can be sure there was no aggression involved and I'd be doing a bucket load more than 4 years. Given the number of drivers that kill cyclists through inattention, the evidence would suggest that you wouldn't be convicted at all, and if you were would get no jail time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyfriday Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 Did you read the comments below. If true, this one is very interesting What's Steve Hoyland's point I wonder, is he bragging or complaining? I can think of many who'd like to see drug dealers dealt with on the same basis as rapists, killers and paedophiles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poppet2 Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 It's pretty obvious really. The fact that this poor chap died was, in effect, an accident. There was no intent to kill. What has that got to do with anything? Try telling that to his grieving parents. His punch resulted in his death, end of. The law states that the necessary intent of murder OR GBH, qualifies someone to be given a life sentence. This was pre-meditated and as a result of GBH, someone died. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyfriday Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 What has that got to do with anything? Try telling that to his grieving parents. His punch resulted in his death, end of. The law states that the necessary intent of murder OR GBH, qualifies someone to be given a life sentence. This was pre-meditated and as a result of GBH, someone died. In what way was the attack pre-meditated? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted February 27, 2014 Author Share Posted February 27, 2014 In what way was the attack pre-meditated? Not that I can see but that shouldn't stop him get the top end of a manslaughter sentence. Don't want a high end manslaughter sentence? Stop going round punching people - who may or may not fall and die. It wasn't an accident, only the stupid would say otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 What has that got to do with anything? It's the reason the attacker got a relatively short sentence. It's kind of the whole point of the discussion. Manslaughter, correctly in my opinion, attracts a shorter sentence than murder. Try telling that to his grieving parents. Why would I want to do that? His punch resulted in his death, end of. Yes. Tragic though that was, relative to the number of punches thrown in total single punches resulting in death are very rare. The law states that the necessary intent of murder OR GBH, qualifies someone to be given a life sentence. This was pre-meditated and as a result of GBH, someone died. No it wasn't. ---------- Post added 27-02-2014 at 17:17 ---------- It wasn't an accident, only the stupid would say otherwise. In the sense that death wasn't the intended outcome, it was accidental. ---------- Post added 27-02-2014 at 17:22 ---------- 4 years or 2 for good behaver for an attack that could have killed 90% of people. This is no different to the guy firing a gun at the man. I hope there is a review of the sentence and its increased. Could have killed 90%. Anything else you want to pull out of thin air? I agree that this 90% is utterly ludicrous. Think about the number of punches that must get thrown in this country every year - I think we'd have to arrive at a figure in the tens, possibly hundreds of thousands. Then think about the number of times we hear of people who have died following a single punch. Sadly, it's not unheard of, but it's clearly a comparitively rare event. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted February 27, 2014 Author Share Posted February 27, 2014 Hurting someone was the intended outcome. Violence was the intended outcome. It isn't a case of self defence. He didn't need to start that confrontation and finish it how he did. Maybe you go around punching folk so see this sentence as a comfort. I don't. It's manslaughter and should be given a far bigger sentence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyfriday Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 Not that I can see but that shouldn't stop him get the top end of a manslaughter sentence. Don't want a high end manslaughter sentence? Stop going round punching people - who may or may not fall and die. But you could say that about any crime-don't want life imprisonment-dont drop litter, it's about proportionality in sentencing, otherwise perpetrators of premeditated murders with aggravating features (group attack, abduction, premeditated, no provocation, sexual, racial, religious etc etc) aren't punished any worse than the 'one punch killers' and I think society needs to reflect the level of grievousness of crimes during the sentencing exercise otherwise justice isn't done. Having said all that I think the sentence here was too low, but I wouldn't put it at the high end of manslaughter either It wasn't an accident, only the stupid would say otherwise. I didn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted February 27, 2014 Author Share Posted February 27, 2014 But you could say that about any crime-don't want life imprisonment-dont drop litter, it's about proportionality in sentencing, otherwise perpetrators of premeditated murders with aggravating features (group attack, abduction, premeditated, no provocation, sexual, racial, religious etc etc) aren't punished any worse than the 'one punch killers' and I think society needs to reflect the level of grievousness of crimes during the sentencing exercise otherwise justice isn't done. Having said all that I think the sentence here was too low, but I wouldn't put it at the high end of manslaughter either I didn't. I know you didn't say that last bf, I just couldn't be arsed to find the original quote. ;) Surely we want a less violent society. Punch someone, slap on wrist. Kill someone with one punch effectively 2 years (and he had previous - is it a stretch to say if had been of good character he'd have got less??) What's does that say about how we view violence in our society? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyfriday Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 I know you didn't say that last bf, I just couldn't be arsed to find the original quote. ;) Ah, it is that time of day! Surely we want a less violent society. Punch someone, slap on wrist. Kill someone with one punch effectively 2 years (and he had previous - is it a stretch to say if had been of good character he'd have got less??) What's does that say about how we view violence in our society? I think society is less violent than it was when I was a teenager getting into scrapes, and yes I've punched plenty as a youth and been on the receiving end of a good hiding too, but not without provocation either way. How many times have we heard the father's of bully victims telling them to pick on the biggest and punch his lights out, we used to celebrate aggression in youths. To be honest, I agree with you about the sentencing, but I don't think the circumstances of this case would put it on the same level as a sentence for someone who sets out to deliberately kill someone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.