The price of taking a life. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-south-east-wales-16281868 He probably would have received a higher sentence if he had been involved in the recent riots. The Law is indeed an ass.
Travesty doesn't do it mate a ****ing disgrace and a mockery of the judicial system might get close considering the papers are full of stories of people getting bigger sentences for theft, the whole thing is beyond comprehension
The taking of a life in those circumstances, no matter how you dress up about "intent" all that crap, demands a sentence little short of the maximum possible for the crime of manslaughter. I understand that is life imprisonment. Travesty indeed.
Bad people are able to fall through the judicial cracks in the name of supporting sports teams , it's almost built into society around the world . This seems a case in point . I'm always sad for the VICTIM'S family left behind to watch justice floundering in front of their eyes , frankly I not sure what I'd do if I was one of the family left behind but I'm pretty sure jail time would be a given & also sure the laws might not be so forgiving for me .
I just cant believe that sentence. An absolute disgrace!!!!!!!!! That is not justice!!!!! About 18 months for taking a life!!!!!!!!!! This country is becoming a laughing stock.
why not just say 18 months at the top of the article instead of this phoney 3 years, what a kick in the teeth this is for his family who have to live without him for the rest of their lives..
Agree, some people who encouraged others to violence in the summer got the same just for posting a message on the internet etc....
Look at the sentences some of our guys got for willingly taking part in the ruck after the Chelsea game. I'm not condoning that punchup but comparing what they got for what was little more than "handbags" is totally out of proportion to this ridiculous sentence where a man (regardless of where he was from or who he supported) lost his life. Perspective - my ar$e!!!! Don't the police or CPS have the power to appeal sentences where they are considered too light? I believe the police made the comment that they were happy with the sentence. Of course they were. They got a result, conviction and sentence so ticks in their stats boxes but JUSTICE? NEVER!!!!!
"why not just say 18 months at the top of the article instead of this phoney 3 years" Because the Labour Government introduced 'transparency in sentencing' many years ago which in fact was anything but. Sorry, but he'll actually be released for next Christmas with a tag. Not condoning this despicable act but I suspect the plea of guilty was on the basis of provocation. That's the only way I can explain the sentence. Had it been an unprovoked assault the sentence would have been at least five on a guilty plea to manslaughter without a weapon. The prosecution often appeals sentences that are off the tariff. It's noteworthy that they are not as far as I'm aware.
The judge described the attack as "unprovoked" but I suspect the fact this guy handed himself in voluntarily and is now, allegedly, "suffering from depression" worked in his favour when being sentenced. Lets see how depressed he is when he's out in 12-18 months. Where's the justice for the family? I agree with all the above in particular the stats boxes being ticked As recently as March the House of Commons asked the Government to review sentencing guidelines for those convicted of manslaughter so that sentences can better reflect the severity of the offence. The independent Sentencing Council and the Court of Appeal are responsible for producing sentencing guidelines. There is no current guideline on unlawful act manslaughter but the courts will take account of relevant case law and guidance established by the Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal has concluded that it is not realistic to treat what is described as âone-punch manslaughterâ as comprising a single set of circumstances; cases involving death resulting from a single blow vary greatly in their seriousness. In a judgment issued in December 2009 on manslaughter cases, the Court of Appeal said that âthe manslaughter cases with which we are concerned involved gratuitous, unprovoked violence in the streets of the kind which seriously discourages law-abiding citizens from walking their streets, particularly at nightâ. It went on to say âthat crimes which result in death should be treated more seriously, ...so as to ensure that the increased focus on the fact that the victim has died in consequence of an unlawful act of violence, even where the conviction is for manslaughter, should, in accordance with the legislative intention, be given greater weightâ. The Government have no plans to request to the Sentencing Council to produce a guideline on unlawful act manslaughter. http://services.parliament.uk/hansard/Commons/ByDate/20110512/petitions/part002.html Rule ****ing Britannia
If the prison sentence wasn't already an insult, a six year banning order from football is a pi** take. You get a three year banning order for running on the pitch.
totally agree with everything already above......didn't someone get a similar senatance for knickin' a mars bar in the riots......stinks
