harvey19 Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 after a "moment of madness" i dont think a custody sentence is the right decision, hes got a decent family around him and i believe he was sickened when he found out he couldve killed somebody. I think hes prolly learnt his lesson and as the judicial systems always banging on about not having enough places personally id rather see him get tagged and community service rather than locked up, shouldve saved his bed for an even worse criminal. Unfortunately I do not think he could have escaped a custodial sentence because of the offence. Sadly he seems to be a decent lad from a decent home who got carried away by the excitement. The ones I hope get punished are those who led the attack and urged on others to attack the building. If it wasn't for their actions this young man would not be in prison today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
melthebell Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Unfortunately I do not think he could have escaped a custodial sentence because of the offence. Sadly he seems to be a decent lad from a decent home who got carried away by the excitement. The ones I hope get punished are those who led the attack and urged on others to attack the building. If it wasn't for their actions this young man would not be in prison today. unfortunately i think so too, its how the law in this country is geared, i do think a tag and community service wouldve knocked his head back into gear. instead hes taking up the bed a violent granny mugger, seriel burglar or rapist could be using instead Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordChaverly Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 But he aimed for a gap. That has to be to most desperate defence of the undefendable possible. Most of us can't get the tea-bag into a cup from two feet away. Besides, there are people moving in the gap and in the time it takes for the extinguisher to fall it could have been full. What did he expect the extinguisher to do after impact, come to an immediate standstill at the point he was aiming for? Barnes Wallace was only aiming for the water I suppose. This is no different to throwing a slab off a bridge onto a motorway or railway. Good points here. I suggest that anyone who is persuaded by the 'gap' defence should watch the video, which shows how desperately close someone came to being killed. Not for the first time, the biggest gap is in Wildcat's logic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eater Sundae Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Why not? If chucking a heavy metal thing off a roof and not hitting anyone earns 32 months, how come driving a much heavier metal thing when you can't see properly and actually crushing a woman to death gets you a £200 fine: http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23886884-dead-cyclists-family-angered-by-pound-200-fine-for-lorry-driver.do It's the £200 fine that's wrong, not the 32 months. The crime is acting in a manner that puts people's lives at risk. Whether or not someone is killed should not affect the sentence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spindrift Posted January 11, 2011 Author Share Posted January 11, 2011 It's the £200 fine that's wrong, not the 32 months. The crime is acting in a manner that puts people's lives at risk. Whether or not someone is killed should not affect the sentence. Agree entirely. Whilst cycling, I've been passed with less than a foot's clearance by drivers exceeding the speed limit. Ought they get 32 months inside? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJ sheffield Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 I wonder if he'll be allowed to do a degree inside for free now? They should put him in a cell with Bronson and make him wear a skirt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spindrift Posted January 11, 2011 Author Share Posted January 11, 2011 Like somebody that threw a fire extinguisher off a tall building into a crowd, but didn't come from a decent family? Cos people from decent families never get away with similar acts of criminal lunacy? "Things got out of hand and we'd had a few drinks. We smashed the place up and Boris set fire to the toilets." David Cameron, Oxford, 1986. It's all right though, blame the drink. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
missymoo73 Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Along with drivers who behave equally recklessly? It's a serious question, the fire extinguisher missed hitting somebody by a foot. A driver who doesn't miss and kills someone gets a lesser sentence. Fair? Equitable? Proportionate? Yes if its intentional like his was. He is bloody old enough to know that chucking that of the side of a building could have killed someone. He got lucky - what do you suggest we give him a pat on the back and say now son that was a bit silly but off you go..... As for your drivers comment then yes agree if they get behind the wheel and intentionally drive erratically then they derserve everything thats coming to them.........I am sick to death of us being so bloody namby pamby. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spindrift Posted January 11, 2011 Author Share Posted January 11, 2011 Yes if its intentional like his was. He is bloody old enough to know that chucking that of the side of a building could have killed someone. He got lucky - what do you suggest we give him a pat on the back and say now son that was a bit silly but off you go..... As for your drivers comment then yes agree if they get behind the wheel and intentionally drive erratically then they derserve everything thats coming to them.........I am sick to death of us being so bloody namby pamby. Then we agree, good. The tragedy is the courts treat killing someone on the roads as a misdemeanor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadnBad Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 It is a bit of a harsh sentence for a crime that in the end didn't do any real damage but then it is also a very lenient sentence when you consider what could have happened. On the whole i think a years prison sentence and out in 6 months would have been fairer but since the judge said he was going to make an example of him it's not a surprise that it is a tough sentence. As you can tell i'm in two minds on the matter!. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts