I would say a little bit more would be better but that sounds about right. A DUI, as silly as it is to get in the car when drunk, is still an accident.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
US Soccer Referee Dies After Punch
- Thread starter s7evn
- Start date
- Status
I would say a little bit more would be better but that sounds about right. A DUI, as silly as it is to get in the car when drunk, is still an accident.
It won't harm society too badly if petty criminals repeat their crimes on occasion. What should be concerning is when violent criminals repeat their crimes. They should get life sentences.
CornBurrito
Member
By the way EleventhDoctor, I lost my mother in a car crash due to someone who was texting and driving. That person got charged with vehicular manslaughter.
So I can sympathize with people who lost a family member due to stupidity. I still think life sentences for manslaughter are ridiculous and that rehabilitation is better.
Nice bit of selective reading. Due to prison rape and prison gangs petty criminals move to violent crime more frequently when they get out of prison. I guess we can't take that risk so they should be locked up for life.
If people can have their behavior change for the worse, it seems reasonable that we can alter behavior for the better. This kid isn't some gang member who shot someone for street cred. He isn't a rapist. He is a kid who got angry and punched someone, and accidentally killed another man. I really believe we can rehabilitate someone like that. If we can't then psychology needs to get its ass in gear.
So I can sympathize with people who lost a family member due to stupidity. I still think life sentences for manslaughter are ridiculous and that rehabilitation is better.
Nice bit of selective reading. Due to prison rape and prison gangs petty criminals move to violent crime more frequently when they get out of prison. I guess we can't take that risk so they should be locked up for life.
If people can have their behavior change for the worse, it seems reasonable that we can alter behavior for the better. This kid isn't some gang member who shot someone for street cred. He isn't a rapist. He is a kid who got angry and punched someone, and accidentally killed another man. I really believe we can rehabilitate someone like that. If we can't then psychology needs to get its ass in gear.
And you are aware that petty criminals usually enter jail, learn from the hardened criminals, and come out to do worse crime? Not always but it is a lot.
So again, if you were playing catch with a friend and you hit him in the head and it ended up killing him, you're saying you would deserve life in prison for it?
heliosRAzi
Banned
Then you will have to come to grips with reality: this kid is not a murderer and our justice system was not and is not intended to be a tool for revenge.
We spend all of this money on rehab so that there aren't more victims when the criminal is released back into society. We spend all of that money so that the criminal becomes a productive member of society. The victim is not marginalized; they get the help they need within the bounds of reality: we can't bring people back to life, but we can offer them therapy and compensation.
You say that we are bending over backwards to lessen the crime when the kid will most likely be charged with manslaughter. He will most likely be offered a plea that will lessen the charge down to homicide by assault and from there, the District Attorney and the kid's lawyers will hash out a deal. I guarantee that is what will happen. We don't excuse his behavior; it was wrong and he should face the consequences for that. However, we feel that the kid's life shouldn't be completely ruined by this accident just because some people want revenge.
Well, if that friend has a family or any other type of loved ones, we'll have to appease them by giving life in prison. Think of the children! Handing out a life sentence will suddenly make their world a better place.
CornBurrito
Member
We actually don't spend much money on rehabilitation in the US. Or if we do it is wasted money given the fact that we want both a revenge based system and a rehabilitation system at the same time.
Edit:
Also as callous as this will sound, the family will get over it. Speaking from personal experience, it isn't some life destroying experience to lose a family member due to someone else's stupidity. People get over losing family members all the time. That doesn't mean no sentence should be given and the kid should run free, but allowing spur of the moment emotional decisions to enter our legal system is bullshit.
Alligatorjandro
Banned
He should repay something to the family that will lose the income that the guy brought in.
Yea, people are just commenting completely emotionally right now. But thankfully, thats not how the justice system works in most cases. 'Intent' is a huge, huge part of how a person is judged and thats a good thing.
Frankly, somebody who would lock up a person forever for an accidental death is really no worse than the person on trial. In both cases, lives were ended without good reason.
heliosRAzi
Banned
I was just riffing off of his statement. If we did spend a bunch of money on rehab, I wouldn't see the same inmates come in over and over and over and over again for charges that keep ramping up and up.
metalslimer
Member
How is that supposed to happen with a criminal record. You can't have everything in life. There is no feasible way to make this work besides him become some indentured slave.
First off, you are making an assumption that he was bringing in an income. Secondly, I could agree to the kid being responsible for a lump sum to the family but not something for the rest of his life. The father could have been laid off or fired from his job at any time. Is it the job's responsibility to keep paying you if they had to get rid of you? It's a shitty circumstance, sure, but the kid isn't responsible for aiding this family financially for the rest of his life.
EleventhDoctor
Banned
I am truly sorry to hear this. I can't even imagine. Out of curiosity, what was the person's sentence? I wonder if the sentence is harsher due to the texting.
The legal argument for murder in some states at least would ask did he reasonably know a punch could kill somebody!
I did find this for Utah
http://le.utah.gov/code/TITLE76/htm/76_05_020300.htm
A punch is generally intended to cause injury, I guess a jury has to ask themselves is one punch reasonable clearly dangerous to human life.
CornBurrito
Member
Yeah people are really fucking emotional.
I remember when my sister was asking me to write a victim impact speech soon after we lost our mother. I never did, and I don't think she did either. After a few weeks of coping I think we both realized that advocating for a harsher sentence wouldn't do anything. It doesn't bring the person back, it doesn't make you feel better, it shouldn't be required for you to cope.
Honestly I stopped paying attention to the case after awhile, especially since I went to college and had to focus on academics. I can ask my aunt for you, since she might know.
I don't think texting and driving is a crime in Florida, so it might not have added to her sentence.
The kid is responsible for the man's death and everything that entails.
LOL This thread is crazy.
SystemShock2
Member
Two lives ruined because of bad luck.
I'm sure the kid's a little shit, but no matter what happens, the consequences will stick with him for life. I feel a little bad for him in a way.
I'm sure the kid's a little shit, but no matter what happens, the consequences will stick with him for life. I feel a little bad for him in a way.
EleventhDoctor
Banned
If I was playing catch with a friend and I didn't like the way he played the game, went up and sucker punched him, causing death-then yes, I feel I would deserve a "Life Sentence". I don't see anything wrong with this statement, sorry.
He is not responsible for having to help the family cope, financially, if they need the help. Shit happens and that is rough to say but he will receive his punishment in other ways. Making him indentured to this family isn't the way.
Don't be dense. You know the question he was asking you meant if you hit him with the ball.
Yeah, everyone knows the risks with hitting someone in the head. And if they don't, ignorance isn't an excuse.
EleventhDoctor
Banned
The hypothetical question wasn't similar to the actual case in any way. I modified it to be similar in context.
I disagree. If he has any remorse for what he did he should absolutely be doing something. And if he doesn't have remorse, why let him out of prison?
CornBurrito
Member
EleventhDoctor: I googled it, and it seems charges are still pending. Though idk if the site would update if she was finally charged.
http://www.accidenton95.com/fatal-christmas-eve-accident-on-i-95/#more-3743
I don't think it was updated though. She was suspected to have been drinking but I'm almost certain that was ruled out.
http://www.accidenton95.com/fatal-christmas-eve-accident-on-i-95/#more-3743
I don't think it was updated though. She was suspected to have been drinking but I'm almost certain that was ruled out.
Alligatorjandro
Banned
I dont think its crazy.Him paying the family a fine would do more good than spending the rest of life in jail would do.
heliosRAzi
Banned
You wouldn't get life, though because we have somewhat sane people working in the justice system. That and the prosecution will always go for the easiest charge and sentence. Getting a life sentence for an accidental death will be a difficult case to make.
Both cases were accidents. One was involuntary manslaughter and the other was voluntary. Not a huge difference. You should answer the guys question.
That could happen, but the family would have to sue the kid in civil court after the criminal case is decided.
Not at all. We're talking about a system that locks up people who use recreational drugs longer in some cases than people who commit things like rape or intentionally murder people.
heliosRAzi
Banned
That's why I said "somewhat."
Another thing people overlook is that we have a lot of people in the prison system who have mental health issues.
Somebody made the point that 'this person's actions resulted in the death of somebody, so they should be locked up forever'.
My question was designed to show how there's an obvious requirement of 'intent' in these kinds of things.
Your response was designed specifically to ignore that....
If a billionaire tycoon killed your dad, should he simply buy your dad off? That would benefit the family way more than him being in jail. Paying for his crimes literally isn't a punishment.
Both for sure. Restitution is definitely essential.
I agree that simply being able to buy your way out isn't good, so they should serve the time they were going to serve anyway AND be forced to pay.
EleventhDoctor
Banned
His "intent" was to cause bodily harm-and he succeeded. More so than he was expecting, but the intent and follow through are there. Is there intent to cause harm in a game of catch?
CornBurrito
Member
You sound like someone who wants to have their cake and eat it too. You simply are unlikely to get both. How is someone serving life in prison supposed to pay? Lemme guess, force them to work in prison slave camps? Because that couldn't have any detrimental side effects such as increased minimum sentences for petty crimes.
The intent to harm should be punished differently than the intent to kill in my opinion.
This thread is pissing me off, so I've gotta bail.
Those of you who are suggesting this person should serve life in jail are DISGUSTING. You guys are showing absolutely no ability to judge on a rational basis and are just pleading on an emotional basis, which means you'd fit right in in the 1300's, but not in a modern American court system. As several people have pointed out, thank fucking god you guys have no say in anything, because thats a horrendous 'justice system' you guys have in your heads.
lol read my intial post on this. You're following it to the 'T'.
Those of you who are suggesting this person should serve life in jail are DISGUSTING. You guys are showing absolutely no ability to judge on a rational basis and are just pleading on an emotional basis, which means you'd fit right in in the 1300's, but not in a modern American court system. As several people have pointed out, thank fucking god you guys have no say in anything, because thats a horrendous 'justice system' you guys have in your heads.
lol read my intial post on this. You're following it to the 'T'.
EleventhDoctor
Banned
Yeah unless this person is OJ Simpson-demanding financial compensation is rarely feasible. I understand a need to compensate the family financially, but I don't see it working out in the real world.
Take what they already have and if they get a job when they get out garnish the wages.
That's a problem for the legislature. Sentences for drug crimes are often mandatory. The judges do not have discretion to reduce or refuse to impose them. There is much more discretion in violent crimes.
Exactly. Hopefully the kid's family has insurance so the poor ref's family can get some money out of this.
EleventhDoctor
Banned
This thread is pissing me off, so I've gotta bail.
Those of you who are suggesting this person should serve life in jail are DISGUSTING. You guys are showing absolutely no ability to judge on a rational basis and are just pleading on an emotional basis, which means you'd fit right in in the 1300's, but not in a modern American court system. As several people have pointed out, thank fucking god you guys have no say in anything, because thats a horrendous 'justice system' you guys have in your heads.
lol read my intial post on this. You're following it to the 'T'.
Again-I think some people are not iunderstanding that a "life" sentence is 20 years generally.
CornBurrito
Member
> If they get a job
> Life sentence
How are they getting a job while serving a life sentence in prison. Its them in prison, for life...
Or are we talking about an American "life sentence" of 20-25 years?
Damn why do we even call it a life sentence.
Blood money restitution. It's pretty common.
It's obvious they're not going to prison for the rest of their lives no matter how much I want otherwise. I rather like the idea of criminals being forced to compensate victims and their families.
And you think there's nothing wrong with this? No, the system is broken, plain and simple.
EleventhDoctor
Banned
I've never understood that naming convention. But this is why you sometimes hear that criminals will receive multiple life sentences.
Space Avocat
Member
This is kind of beside the point, but people have been throwing around some terms so I wanted to make sure everyone is clear on what they mean. Voluntary manslaughter is an intentional killing. It's knocked down from murder due to a mitigating factor i.e. provocation. As Dude Adbides mentioned, a wife who freaks out at the sight of her husband cheating and immediately shoots the mistress in the head is guilty of voluntary manslaughter.
That is another fucked up part of our law. Why give people a lenient sentence when they intentionally kill someone, regardless of the circumstances it happened in? Intentionally killing someone is unforgivable.
CornBurrito
Member
Because most people realize that acts don't occur in a vacuum and that circumstances should be accounted for. Same reason why intent is also accounted for.
If a poor man who is literally starving to death steals a piece of bread to live another day gets caught, I think he should be treated differently from some trust fund kid who steals a piece of bread.
What if you killed someone in self defense, or to stop a sex crime? That is an intentional killing.
You seem to have strong feelings on this but I don't think you've thought this through very well.
- Status