A case reported in a paper today
A teenage girl aged 17 and her boyfriend aged 30, and three others, two cannot be named for legal reasons tortured a man with learning difficulties, force-fed him with tablets, before marching him to a viaduct. The teenage girl stamped on the mans fingers so he fell to his death. The boyfriend got 25 years for murder and the teenage girl got 10 years on the same charge.The third adult got 8 years, for manslaughter. All three admitted assault, causing actual bodily harm. The judge said you " bullied him to death". The two younger ones were sentenced to ABH, and for further reports. How is this justice? what the hell is wrong with the legal system in this country. These scum, deliberately tortured and killed this poor man in a most heinous way and all the girl got was ten years, i do not understand that this is punishment, she will be out in 7 years or less with good behaviour and her boyfriend maybe in 15.
Where's the justice for him or his family
2007-07-31 06:39:29 · 35 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
I reported this as i read it, someone though i can't find his reply said that the man died of a fit, even if that was the case, these scum caused his death, and the sentence did not reflect the crime. You go to jail for not paying your council tax, and yet you can almost certainly get away with murder!
2007-07-31 07:01:05 · update #1
Yes thats BS Law..... The law has this statement in its underarms.... Thats a person younger than 18 has a tendency of following what others do without knowing right from wrong.. So they always end up getting lesser punishment. though in this case it is clear that the 17 year old gal should have been old enough to know that stamping a persons fingers hurts... May be some one should have done the same to her to teach her something.... not only to her but all the people involved.
2007-07-31 06:43:40 · answer #1 · answered by a.amitkumar 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Sigh, this must have been in the UK, no other country has such a diabolical justice system. The punishment should reflect the severity of the crime as I have said many times before, age should not come into it.
My mother was murdered along with her friend in 1988, the killing was pre-meditated, but due to this amazing thing they call "diminished responsibility" her killer got just 8 years (the judge said he showed remorse and had the rest of his live to live, at that point I almost got contempt of court for shouting abuse) he served only four years and was free by the time he was 37, just two years younger than my mother was when she died. this was 19 years ago, the system is still horrendous and the victims family seem to suffer far more than the criminals. I live abroad now, thank God.
2007-07-31 06:46:21 · answer #2 · answered by Nickynackynoo 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
7 Years? Joking aren't you? I think you'll find she'll be out in 5 which makes it even worse.
I believe in "an eye for an eye", if you take someones life then why do you deserve to live. If there is evidence beyond questionable doubt then I think the death penalty should be brought back. Maybe people would think twice about such a horrific crime if they knew this would be the consequence.
I just don't understand some people. This poor man had learning difficulties yes, but I think you'll find that his murderers were the true mentally ill ones.
2007-07-31 06:44:09 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The clue is in what the Judge said: ''You bullied him to death''.
The Judge made a leap of intellect from 'tortured' to 'bullied' and having settled on Bullied then made a further intellectual leap to his Public School upbringing; in as much as Bullying equates to harmless de-bagging at boarding school.
It just so happens that this in the Judge's mind had an unfortunate and incidental outcome...Death.
''Not really murder don't cha know'' would be the attitude.
This mentality unfortunately is rife in the Judiciary and is very much the downside of employing (as Judges) Middle to Upper-class Twats.
There is an abundance of Law, but absolutely NO Justice.
2007-07-31 07:23:30 · answer #4 · answered by rogerglyn 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Ooh good point Rogerglyn! Let's employ some working class twats as judges instead....
Judges apply the law in a sober fashion, not in some hysterical way that seems to have become the norm in just about every other facet of public life in this country.
Yes it was an awful crime and personally I'd like to see the little tinkers shot in the head. Which is precisely why I'm not a Judge.
Cretin....
2007-07-31 07:31:46 · answer #5 · answered by Answer Me! 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
There isn't justice in this country, at all. If you are rich enough and can afford a decent lawyer you can get away with most stuff. This story is just a terrible example of how terrible our legal system really is. Think about all the scum that get out of prison because of say there dad is a "drug baron", and can afford bail for pretty much anything. Its just wrong.
2007-07-31 06:44:16 · answer #6 · answered by zach 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
In my mind the problem in many cases is that the judges know that there is simply no place for these people to go. There are no facilities, and those that do actually exist are full to bursting. Therefore in cases of lesser crimes (in what universe is murder a lesser crime anyway) the judges have to do what they can. In the case of the minor there was probably an argument that she was persuaded to act the way she did by her older compatriots and as a minor she had to be treated as such by the court. I agree with you whole heartedly, but this is how it is in this country, justice is expensive and sometimes Americans forget that and choose instead to save their money for their own uses.
2007-07-31 06:45:21 · answer #7 · answered by DJTT 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I have no idea who sets up the standards for punishment on different crimes but they certainly did a crappy job didn't they? Proper punishment - take them to the viaduct, let them hang by their fingers over the edge and let the dead man's family stomp on their fingers. When they fall, if they live - so be it and they should then rot in jail. If they die- so be it. It should not matter how old the perpetrators are.
2007-07-31 06:45:08 · answer #8 · answered by lilith663 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Well..I dont call thats Justice..Its stupid...
I mean The girl only got 10 years!?!?! lol maybe the girl have sex with the lawyer lol sorry for my behavior but who knows? its true sometimes???? and his BF got 25 well I would say justice if
she and he got 15 years of speding in the jail and those Others
must have 20 now that I call IS Very Un-justified lol im a bad lawyer...
2007-07-31 06:46:35 · answer #9 · answered by Insane questioner 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You dont get a specific number of years for murder, so they must have either been done for manslaughter, or they got done for murder with a minimum tariff of 25 yrs & 10 yrs. If they got done for manslaughter that is not good enough. I agree with you, this was a terrible case.
2007-08-06 14:53:56 · answer #10 · answered by kitty 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋