Great British Justice

If it was intentional then the circumstances must be examined properly, however if he was laughing afterwards the presumption that he did it on purpose to a degree must be accepted. The line is fine between the two (murder and manslaughter) and also sounds that the fault partially lays with the man who walked out onto the road without looking. I do think that in the case of murder then the highest sentences should be mandatory (including the death penalty) but the line for unintentional killing is a harder line to draw and should be taken case by case.

The intro given at the start seems as though it was intentional killing in which i'd say anything but a life sentence (meaning full life) is acceptable.

I fail to see why the daily mail would need to include the information that he was listening to rap music?
It's idiotic papers like this that give the beautiful music of the rap genre a bad name, all because of a useless human being acting like a complete idiot whilst apparently listening to it.

This man is a failure of society, thinking its cool to drive cars around very fast - and look what has happened now?
I hope he has the death of this poor victim on his conscience for the rest of his life.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

If it was intentional then the circumstances must be examined properly, however if he was laughing afterwards the presumption that he did it on purpose to a degree must be accepted. The line is fine between the two (murder and manslaughter) and also sounds that the fault partially lays with the man who walked out onto the road without looking. I do think that in the case of murder then the highest sentences should be mandatory (including the death penalty) but the line for unintentional killing is a harder line to draw and should be taken case by case.

The intro given at the start seems as though it was intentional killing in which i'd say anything but a life sentence (meaning full life) is acceptable.

---

It's a strange case. It also suggests he was showing off this "amazing car" (not really amazing, just a Volvo, but that's not the case), so why he would want to intentionally damage his brother's car is beyond rational thinking. Like being given a PS3 and purposely throwing the controller at it, or stuffing games into the blu-ray drive. Indeed, some blame should go towards the victim, even though chucking blame at the dead is considered a bit harsh, especially for any remaining family and friends. However, the speed the driver was doing was pretty dreadful. Yes, speeding at 70mph is "okay" if you don't hit someone, but he did and the speed he was doing sealed the victims fate, and 70mph in a 30mph zone is a helluva lot, so timing between the victim and the incident may of been obscured.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jayme

I fail to see why the daily mail would need to include the information that he was listening to rap music?
It's idiotic papers like this that give the beautiful music of the rap genre a bad name, all because of a useless human being acting like a complete idiot whilst apparently listening to it.

This man is a failure of society, thinking its cool to drive cars around very fast - and look what has happened now?
I hope he has the death of this poor victim on his conscience for the rest of his life.

---

The Daily Mail is reporting what happened, if he was listening to rap music like the paper says then you really cannot try to deny that fact. It also ties in with the suspicions many people have concerning rap music which includes the culture of fast cars, guns, drugs, sex and crime.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

The Daily Mail is reporting what happened, if he was listening to rap music like the paper says then you really cannot try to deny that fact. It also ties in with the suspicions many people have concerning rap music which includes the culture of fast cars, guns, drugs, sex and crime.

---

Indeed i can see your point of view, but it's not an essential bit of information that the reader needs and, in my opinion, its the daily mail just trying to give the rap music a bad image and reputation - as most people do.
Rap music doesn't just involve MC'ing about guns, drugs, fast cars, women and money neither - most MC's rap about daily struggles and give inspiration to young men growing up in bad areas too. It's like every other type of music genre, it has its cons and its pros but to say its just advertises gun culture etc is not something ill accept.

I think I agree with Jordy on this one.
I don't think the driver set out to murder the man, so I would say 4 years is reasonable. But, I think more time should have been added on, because he drove on and left the man, and because of the extent he went to to cover it up. (The article says he got rid of his phone and sim, and his brother forged a receipt saying the car had been sold earlier on that day.) I think he should also get a life, if not a very long driving ban.
As for the giggling part, I think thats just your typical ******** in newspapers, and should be disregarded as theres no proof.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stephenHi

Lol are people really defending a non-english (could of guessed) murderer?

---

If he was an immigrant god knows the Daily Mail would've had it in the headline as well as the article.

It is said that a humans life is worth more than every jewel, gold and silver in this world, but I guess the victims life didn't mean much to the killer seeing as how he sped off laughing. Fair enough, he didn't go out with the intention of killing someone, but due to his own foolishness that is what happened. A twelve year old girl has now lost her father forever. This killer has deeply hurt many people and they will be emotionally scarred for life. If it were up to me I would double the sentence, but seeing as it isn't all I can do is hope the killer gets whats coming to him in the future.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jordy

Some of you make it sound like he's raped a child or something. The laughing is of course despicable and so is the driving off but I'm often seeing people on here go on about how they're going over the speed limit and I'm sure peoples parents do it too. He did not intentionally do it or murder anyone, I'm afraid a guy was stood in the middle of a road from what I can gather and should be more careful, it may of being going 70MPH but cars don't come out of no where, they're incredibly loud.

I think four years is pretty much fair, for his attitude I'd chuck him in for a few more years but I don't see any real issue here. I hope none of you ever end up on a jury :P

---

Do you know the person or something? I don't see why you're arguing his case so strongly - he's clearly scum and four years is a pathetic insult on the life and family of the man who died.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Black_Apalachi

Do you know the person or something? I don't see why you're arguing his case so strongly - he's clearly scum and four years is a pathetic insult on the life and family of the man who died.

---

You're blowing things out of proportion, I'm not arguing his case strongly or playing the devils advocate. People were suggesting he should be executed, chucking around that he was foreign and saying that he was a murderer. I could pretty much say the same to you, do you know the guy who died or something? I don't have much of an issue with the sentence, I think it should be a bit longer but the justice system seems to of worked here.