Community

Forum menu
We accept this was ...
 

[Closed] We accept this was never a case with an intention to kill

Posts: 8893
Free Member
Topic starter
 

So when he threw a bottle at someone what was his intention?

[url= http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/7948204.stm ]Barmaid killed[/url]


 
Posted : 17/03/2009 3:37 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

To hurt him?


 
Posted : 17/03/2009 3:39 pm
Posts: 6
Free Member
 

This is why we have an offence of manslaughter (carrying a maximum sentence of life imprisonment) and an offence of murder (currently) carrying a mandatory life sentence. He didn't mean to kill her. It was however a predictable consequence of his acting like a dick. Manslughter is appropriate and he will serve quite a while in prison.


 
Posted : 17/03/2009 3:52 pm
Posts: 41798
Free Member
 

ditto, he threw a bottle into a crowded bar, it smashed and someone died as a result, a completely stupid thing to do, but he didn't intend to kill anyone.


 
Posted : 17/03/2009 3:55 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

as above


 
Posted : 17/03/2009 3:56 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Case closed.


 
Posted : 17/03/2009 4:12 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Yep, very stupid thing to do. But clearly he didn't intend to kill anyone.


 
Posted : 17/03/2009 4:12 pm
Posts: 14774
Free Member
 

Jeeze the kangaroo court has formed, adjudicated and disbanded before I got chance to wave my gavel. Damn!


 
Posted : 17/03/2009 4:26 pm
Posts: 36
Free Member
 

coffeking, you could always move for appeal.

there's always more mileage to be made out of the STW judiciary system. And vast fees too. Vast fees.


 
Posted : 17/03/2009 4:35 pm
Posts: 7358
Free Member
 

Idiot? Yes.
Murderer? No.
Should he get a very long sentence? Of course. A woman died as a direct result of his actions.


 
Posted : 17/03/2009 5:12 pm
Posts: 14774
Free Member
 

Too late 'yote, the hammer has fallen - yer yellin at the back of the prison van as it leaves ๐Ÿ˜‰


 
Posted : 17/03/2009 5:14 pm