Is this justice or does it go too far?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070325/ap_on_re_us/picture_sentence
2007-03-25 17:52:03 · 11 answers · asked by Cacaoatl 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
I have no problem with that.
2007-03-25 17:56:25 · answer #1 · answered by Need Answers 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's absurd, but I think in perspective, the sentence was pretty lenient...
Getting roaring drunk, driving like a bat outta hell, and killing someone with your vehicle is something I would consider a relatively serious crime.
I never heard of that picture thing being done before, but I see no reason why its not a good idea. Maybe when he looks everyday at that picture, he'll realize how poor his judement was and makes better choices in his life.
But even that won't bring the victim back.
2007-03-25 19:03:20 · answer #2 · answered by sterling 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Oh gee...poor guy. He has to have a picture displayed in his house, while his victim is dead, and the family has a lifetime of grief and questions to deal with. To answer your question, NO, it is not justice. It would be impossible to make this guy truly feel the consequences of his actions without standing him in the middle of a street and having some street-racing punk run him down.
2007-03-25 18:01:57 · answer #3 · answered by Max 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The judge has wide latitude to render decisions and in this case meet out punishment. As long as the punishment is not cruel and/or unusual (in this case the killer is not held up to daily public ridicule, the sign is in his home) the judge is probably within his rights to rule as he did.
2007-03-25 18:07:45 · answer #4 · answered by fredrick z 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's unusual, but two years is a light sentence for manslaughter so it might be justified. I believe in creative sentencing because traditional approaches do n't seem very effective.
2007-03-25 18:07:35 · answer #5 · answered by Scotty 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The judge was under diress and in violation of private policies. This drunken killer should pay, but in all reality, this was an accident. Looking in on a person's private home after any arrest is not too cool.
2007-03-25 18:00:40 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Not far enough. That dead person won't be seeing his loved ones or those people seeing him. Driving is a privilege, not a right.
2007-03-25 17:59:31 · answer #7 · answered by theshadowknows 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It makes sense to me. Accountability is a long term project.
2007-03-25 17:57:20 · answer #8 · answered by Pablo 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sounds fair to me. The victim won't be able to live her life, nor will her parents be able to close their eyes without seeing her......
2007-03-25 18:03:16 · answer #9 · answered by free_eagle716 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What a great idea. Five years would have been better.
2007-03-25 18:18:21 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
He should just be glad I wasn't the judge.
2007-03-25 18:21:59 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋