Discussion:
The 'monkey bike' killer
(too old to reply)
felix
2017-05-30 10:31:14 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
he got only 4 years. pathetic! but the woman who drove her car full of
kids into the lake got 20!
--
"Multiculturanism equals white ethnocide"
http://thereligionofpeace.com
http://www.barenakedislam.com/
http://www.siotw.org
Trevor
2017-05-30 11:34:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by felix
he got only 4 years. pathetic!
He got 7, with a minimum of 4.
Post by felix
but the woman who drove her car full of kids into the lake got 20!
Well one was a deliberate multiple premeditated murder, while the other
was recklessly causing accidental death. Both a little light on perhaps.

Trevor.
felix
2017-05-30 13:40:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Trevor
Post by felix
he got only 4 years. pathetic!
He got 7, with a minimum of 4.
yes
Post by Trevor
Post by felix
but the woman who drove her car full of kids into the lake got 20!
26 with a minimum of 20

and we know they will only serve the minimum is both cases
Post by Trevor
Well one was a deliberate multiple premeditated murder, while the
other was recklessly causing accidental death. Both a little light on
perhaps.
his certainly was. the maximum he could have been given was 20 years. he
should be serving a lot longer than 4! a loving wife and mother had her
life cut short, and the scumbag gets to live his. also he breached bail
and was charged with receiving stolen property, and was using ice while
on bail.
Post by Trevor
Trevor.
--
"Multiculturanism equals white ethnocide"
http://thereligionofpeace.com
http://www.barenakedislam.com/
http://www.siotw.org
Trevor
2017-05-31 08:01:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by felix
Post by Trevor
Post by felix
he got only 4 years. pathetic!
He got 7, with a minimum of 4.
yes
Post by Trevor
Post by felix
but the woman who drove her car full of kids into the lake got 20!
26 with a minimum of 20
and we know they will only serve the minimum is both cases
Post by Trevor
Well one was a deliberate multiple premeditated murder, while the
other was recklessly causing accidental death. Both a little light on
perhaps.
his certainly was. the maximum he could have been given was 20 years. he
should be serving a lot longer than 4! a loving wife and mother had her
life cut short, and the scumbag gets to live his. also he breached bail
and was charged with receiving stolen property, and was using ice while
on bail.
But why do you think a premeditated deliberate murder of multiple
victims is no worse than an accidental death caused by a reckless
fuckwit if both were to get 20 years? As I said, BOTH are probably light
on, not just his. But she certainly deserves FAR more jail time than him
IMO. And obviously the courts as well.

Trevor.
Noddy
2017-05-31 11:07:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Trevor
Post by felix
his certainly was. the maximum he could have been given was 20 years.
he should be serving a lot longer than 4! a loving wife and mother had
her life cut short, and the scumbag gets to live his. also he breached
bail and was charged with receiving stolen property, and was using ice
while on bail.
But why do you think a premeditated deliberate murder of multiple
victims is no worse than an accidental death caused by a reckless
fuckwit if both were to get 20 years? As I said, BOTH are probably light
on, not just his. But she certainly deserves FAR more jail time than him
IMO. And obviously the courts as well.
Only because they faced different charges.

Culpable driving seldom, if ever, attracts a stiff sentence even in
circumstances where it is clearly warranted like this one. Given his
priors, his behaviour while on bail, his lack of anything like any
remorse and the fact that he fled the scene in an act of cowardly
self-preservation he should have received the *maximum* sentence of 20
years in my opinion.
--
--
--
Regards,
Noddy.
Max
2017-05-31 11:23:16 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Noddy
Post by Trevor
Post by felix
his certainly was. the maximum he could have been given was 20 years.
he should be serving a lot longer than 4! a loving wife and mother
had her life cut short, and the scumbag gets to live his. also he
breached bail and was charged with receiving stolen property, and was
using ice while on bail.
But why do you think a premeditated deliberate murder of multiple
victims is no worse than an accidental death caused by a reckless
fuckwit if both were to get 20 years? As I said, BOTH are probably
light on, not just his. But she certainly deserves FAR more jail time
than him IMO. And obviously the courts as well.
Only because they faced different charges.
Culpable driving seldom, if ever, attracts a stiff sentence even in
circumstances where it is clearly warranted like this one. Given his
priors, his behaviour while on bail, his lack of anything like any
remorse and the fact that he fled the scene in an act of cowardly
self-preservation he should have received the *maximum* sentence of 20
years in my opinion.
He was probably under the influence of ice at the time, which in my view
means he is not responsible for his actions.
Xeno
2017-05-31 12:03:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Max
Post by Noddy
Post by Trevor
Post by felix
his certainly was. the maximum he could have been given was 20 years.
he should be serving a lot longer than 4! a loving wife and mother
had her life cut short, and the scumbag gets to live his. also he
breached bail and was charged with receiving stolen property, and was
using ice while on bail.
But why do you think a premeditated deliberate murder of multiple
victims is no worse than an accidental death caused by a reckless
fuckwit if both were to get 20 years? As I said, BOTH are probably
light on, not just his. But she certainly deserves FAR more jail time
than him IMO. And obviously the courts as well.
Only because they faced different charges.
Culpable driving seldom, if ever, attracts a stiff sentence even in
circumstances where it is clearly warranted like this one. Given his
priors, his behaviour while on bail, his lack of anything like any
remorse and the fact that he fled the scene in an act of cowardly
self-preservation he should have received the *maximum* sentence of 20
years in my opinion.
He was probably under the influence of ice at the time, which in my view
means he is not responsible for his actions.
That is crap. It was his choice to take the ice. Same as it is a drunks
choice to drink. By your logic, all drunk drivers involved in accidents
in which people die should be let off because they too are *not
responsible for their actions.
--
Xeno
Ned Latham
2017-05-31 13:04:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Max wrote:

----snip----
Post by Max
He was probably under the influence of ice at the time, which in my view
means he is not responsible for his actions.
Pig's arse, he's not. Self-impairment should be treated as an
aggravating factor, not a mitigating one.
Clocky
2017-05-31 14:24:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Max
Post by Noddy
Post by Trevor
Post by felix
his certainly was. the maximum he could have been given was 20 years.
he should be serving a lot longer than 4! a loving wife and mother
had her life cut short, and the scumbag gets to live his. also he
breached bail and was charged with receiving stolen property, and was
using ice while on bail.
But why do you think a premeditated deliberate murder of multiple
victims is no worse than an accidental death caused by a reckless
fuckwit if both were to get 20 years? As I said, BOTH are probably
light on, not just his. But she certainly deserves FAR more jail time
than him IMO. And obviously the courts as well.
Only because they faced different charges.
Culpable driving seldom, if ever, attracts a stiff sentence even in
circumstances where it is clearly warranted like this one. Given his
priors, his behaviour while on bail, his lack of anything like any
remorse and the fact that he fled the scene in an act of cowardly
self-preservation he should have received the *maximum* sentence of 20
years in my opinion.
He was probably under the influence of ice at the time, which in my view
means he is not responsible for his actions.
That's a choice he made so he is responsible.
Blue Peeler
2017-05-31 20:23:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Max
Post by Noddy
Post by Trevor
Post by felix
his certainly was. the maximum he could have been given was 20
years. he should be serving a lot longer than 4! a loving wife
and mother had her life cut short, and the scumbag gets to live
his. also he breached bail and was charged with receiving
stolen property, and was using ice while on bail.
But why do you think a premeditated deliberate murder of multiple
victims is no worse than an accidental death caused by a reckless
fuckwit if both were to get 20 years? As I said, BOTH are probably
light on, not just his. But she certainly deserves FAR more jail
time than him IMO. And obviously the courts as well.
Only because they faced different charges.
Culpable driving seldom, if ever, attracts a stiff sentence even in
circumstances where it is clearly warranted like this one. Given his
priors, his behaviour while on bail, his lack of anything like any
remorse and the fact that he fled the scene in an act of cowardly
self-preservation he should have received the maximum sentence of 20
years in my opinion.
He was probably under the influence of ice at the time, which in my
view means he is not responsible for his actions.
Actually the correct interpretation for people who (other than those
who (for example) are "mickey-finned" is that they are/should be,
denied the defence of accident and face strict liability for the
consequences of their actions.

In the case of driving a car whilst full of ice or similar, the cops
should apply a bullet to the back of the head with the bill for the
bullet and the cop's laundry sent to the family of the druggie.
Noddy
2017-05-31 22:02:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Blue Peeler
Post by Max
Post by Noddy
Culpable driving seldom, if ever, attracts a stiff sentence even in
circumstances where it is clearly warranted like this one. Given his
priors, his behaviour while on bail, his lack of anything like any
remorse and the fact that he fled the scene in an act of cowardly
self-preservation he should have received the maximum sentence of 20
years in my opinion.
He was probably under the influence of ice at the time, which in my
view means he is not responsible for his actions.
Actually the correct interpretation for people who (other than those
who (for example) are "mickey-finned" is that they are/should be,
denied the defence of accident and face strict liability for the
consequences of their actions.
In the case of driving a car whilst full of ice or similar, the cops
should apply a bullet to the back of the head with the bill for the
bullet and the cop's laundry sent to the family of the druggie.
Couldn't agree more.
--
--
--
Regards,
Noddy.
Ned Latham
2017-05-31 22:21:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
----snip----
Post by Blue Peeler
Post by Max
Post by Noddy
Culpable driving seldom, if ever, attracts a stiff sentence even in
circumstances where it is clearly warranted like this one. Given his
priors, his behaviour while on bail, his lack of anything like any
remorse and the fact that he fled the scene in an act of cowardly
self-preservation he should have received the maximum sentence of 20
years in my opinion.
He was probably under the influence of ice at the time, which in my
view means he is not responsible for his actions.
Actually the correct interpretation for people who (other than those
who (for example) are "mickey-finned"
Say it like this, Blue: "people who self-impair".
Post by Blue Peeler
is that they are/should be, denied the defence of accident and face
strict liability for the consequences of their actions.
Yep. Self-impairment should be treated as an aggravating factor,
not a mitigating one.
Post by Blue Peeler
In the case of driving a car whilst full of ice or similar, the cops
should apply a bullet to the back of the head with the bill for the
bullet and the cop's laundry sent to the family of the druggie.
Remove them from the gene pool at no cost to the taxpayer. Love it.
Pelican
2017-05-31 22:25:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ned Latham
----snip----
Post by Blue Peeler
Post by Max
Post by Noddy
Culpable driving seldom, if ever, attracts a stiff sentence even in
circumstances where it is clearly warranted like this one. Given his
priors, his behaviour while on bail, his lack of anything like any
remorse and the fact that he fled the scene in an act of cowardly
self-preservation he should have received the maximum sentence of 20
years in my opinion.
He was probably under the influence of ice at the time, which in my
view means he is not responsible for his actions.
Actually the correct interpretation for people who (other than those
who (for example) are "mickey-finned"
Say it like this, Blue: "people who self-impair".
Post by Blue Peeler
is that they are/should be, denied the defence of accident and face
strict liability for the consequences of their actions.
Yep. Self-impairment should be treated as an aggravating factor,
not a mitigating one.
Post by Blue Peeler
In the case of driving a car whilst full of ice or similar, the cops
should apply a bullet to the back of the head with the bill for the
bullet and the cop's laundry sent to the family of the druggie.
Remove them from the gene pool at no cost to the taxpayer. Love it.
Preacher, follow thy own sermon.
Ned Latham
2017-05-31 23:03:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Pelican
Post by Ned Latham
----snip----
Post by Blue Peeler
Post by Max
Post by Noddy
Culpable driving seldom, if ever, attracts a stiff sentence even in
circumstances where it is clearly warranted like this one. Given his
priors, his behaviour while on bail, his lack of anything like any
remorse and the fact that he fled the scene in an act of cowardly
self-preservation he should have received the maximum sentence of 20
years in my opinion.
He was probably under the influence of ice at the time, which in my
view means he is not responsible for his actions.
Actually the correct interpretation for people who (other than those
who (for example) are "mickey-finned"
Say it like this, Blue: "people who self-impair".
Post by Blue Peeler
is that they are/should be, denied the defence of accident and face
strict liability for the consequences of their actions.
Yep. Self-impairment should be treated as an aggravating factor,
not a mitigating one.
Post by Blue Peeler
In the case of driving a car whilst full of ice or similar, the cops
should apply a bullet to the back of the head with the bill for the
bullet and the cop's laundry sent to the family of the druggie.
Remove them from the gene pool at no cost to the taxpayer. Love it.
Preacher, follow thy own sermon.
You think Blue Peeler's a preacher? You're mad.
Par for the course, I supopose. It's bit like
you ever read for comprehension, is it.

As to the "sermon", he doesn't strike me as the
type who would take the law into his own hands.
Rather unlike you, ay.

I guess it's time to bring back your theme song:

There's a stinking great turd named the Pelican,
Who lives at the tip with his Smelly-Cam.
He thinks he has smarts,
Coz he photographs farts,
But think a real thought? Huh! like hell 'e can.
Trevor
2017-06-02 06:28:29 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Max
He was probably under the influence of ice at the time, which in my view
means he is not responsible for his actions.
On the contrary, driving under the influence of alcohol OR drugs is NOT
an excuse for homicide!
NOR should it be!!!

Trevor

D Walford
2017-05-31 12:55:19 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Noddy
Post by Trevor
Post by felix
his certainly was. the maximum he could have been given was 20 years.
he should be serving a lot longer than 4! a loving wife and mother
had her life cut short, and the scumbag gets to live his. also he
breached bail and was charged with receiving stolen property, and was
using ice while on bail.
But why do you think a premeditated deliberate murder of multiple
victims is no worse than an accidental death caused by a reckless
fuckwit if both were to get 20 years? As I said, BOTH are probably
light on, not just his. But she certainly deserves FAR more jail time
than him IMO. And obviously the courts as well.
Only because they faced different charges.
Culpable driving seldom, if ever, attracts a stiff sentence even in
circumstances where it is clearly warranted like this one. Given his
priors, his behaviour while on bail, his lack of anything like any
remorse and the fact that he fled the scene in an act of cowardly
self-preservation he should have received the *maximum* sentence of 20
years in my opinion.
Certainly 4yrs if he behaves in prison is far from adequate in the
circumstances, not likely to ever get the max but at least double what
he did get is more realistic and even more would be better.
Don't know if he was drug affected but if he was it shouldn't make any
difference to the sentence.
--
Daryl
Ned Latham
2017-05-31 12:28:19 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Trevor wrote:

----snip----
Post by Trevor
she certainly deserves FAR more jail time than him
IMO. And obviously the courts as well.
That's "the court's", moron.
hector
2017-05-30 15:17:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by felix
he got only 4 years. pathetic! but the woman who drove her car full of
kids into the lake got 20!
Maybe the woman who drove her kids into the lake should've stayed in
Sudan. Things aren't turning out well for Sudanese coming to this country.
Government Shill #2
2017-05-30 21:42:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by felix
he got only 4 years. pathetic! but the woman who drove her car full of
kids into the lake got 20!
Intent, one had it, the other didn't.

Murder vs culpable driving causing death. Unhappy with the outcome? Tell a state
politician to change the law.

Shill #2
--
Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance
to those of us who do.
Isaac Asimov
felix
2017-05-31 00:03:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Government Shill #2
Post by felix
he got only 4 years. pathetic! but the woman who drove her car full of
kids into the lake got 20!
Intent, one had it, the other didn't.
Murder vs culpable driving causing death. Unhappy with the outcome? Tell a state
politician to change the law.
oh I'm sure it's not just me who's unhappy
Post by Government Shill #2
Shill #2
--
Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance
to those of us who do.
Isaac Asimov
--
"Multiculturanism equals white ethnocide"
http://thereligionofpeace.com
http://www.barenakedislam.com/
http://www.siotw.org
Trevor
2017-05-31 08:03:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by felix
Post by Government Shill #2
Post by felix
he got only 4 years. pathetic! but the woman who drove her car full of
kids into the lake got 20!
Intent, one had it, the other didn't.
Murder vs culpable driving causing death. Unhappy with the outcome? Tell a state
politician to change the law.
oh I'm sure it's not just me who's unhappy
And clearly not everyone agrees with you either!

Trevor.
Loading...