http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_781847.html?menu=news.latestheadlines http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30100-12307871,00.html So that's Britain's criminal justice system. Hunnisett drowns an 81 year man, a clergyman, and then hacks him up like a watermelon, and gets five and a half years. But, prosecutors thought that was too lenient, so they doubled it to 11 years, meaning that with time served, Hunnisett could be out in time for his 28th birthday. If this happened in the U.S., where he most certainly would have been charged as an adult, the likely sentence would have been 25 to life, or, life imprisonment. Contrast that with the case of Tony Martin, the English farmer who shot and killed a teenager who had broken into his home. Even though Martin had been victimized in the past by other intruders, prosecutors charged him with murder, for which he was convicted and given life imprisonment. Only after that verdict was overturned, Martin was convicted of manslaughter and given five years, and then denied parole because he was deemed insufficiently remorseful. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Should #2 have felt remorse? I personally think you have the right to blow the head off of anyone (with the exception of law enforcement personel) who sets foot inside your house without your permission. Nobody made them crawl through your window. As for the kid going out of his way to commit the crime and then hacking the body up....eeeew. Should get a lot longer.
Jerek, You need to look at Martin's case more closely, you missed some seriously pertinant information there. BTW, in the US, if sentenced to life imprisonment, when are you eligible for parole? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
im not sure after how long they're eligible, but i dont think it lasts too long; for that reason they give life upon life, etc. so that once he's legible for parole on one sentence, he automatically starts serving another one. i THINK thats how it works.
How about this hypothetical scenario.... a guy hears his door smashed in and lots of shouting, guy runs downstairs shooting as he goes....killing several cops who had broken into his house on a no knock search at the wrong address....what should happen to him?
jps, Nothing should happen to him, and if he is wounded, he's entitled to sue the police. Remember, in your scenario, he is innocent of malice, believing his life is in danger from armed men breaking into his home. He has a right to defend himself against this perceived threat, as it's unreasonable for someone to assume he know's they're police. Here the fault clearly lies with the officer that misidentified the house, and the system that allowed that error to go unchecked, hence liability lies with the police. Think of it this way - what if they break down the wrong door in a similar situation and shoot dead an unarmed innocent person that walks into view at the wrong time?
I don't believe so. There was an intruder in his house and he defended himself and his family. That depends on the state, judge, jury, and sentence. In Canada, all murders get a "life sentence." For first degree, parole can be considered after 25 years. For second degree, parole can be considered after 10 - 25 years, set by the judge on recommendation by the jury. For third degree (manslaughter), parole can be considered immediately and in some cases you won't even go to jail.
Yeah it's a joke, they should have more judges like "Judge Pickles". He knew how to deal with trash like Hunnisett, and Martin would have been judged according to the circumstances. Too many slapped wrists for blatant crimes (prisons are too full to house them), and too many errors of judgement.
there is a reason that people are concidered children and get lighter sentances the idiocy of the US which says that they are children in some circumstances and adults in others is a joke as for the guy shooting someone so he should what if it was his wife coming home when he didnt expect, sending the message that people can shoot first and ask latter is ridiculas
Jerrek, Martin doesn't have a family for a start. He defended himself by boobytrapping his house and then shot and killed one 16-year-old intruder with an illegally held shotgun and then chased after the other and shot him ion the legs outside his house as he was running away. That's not to say that he wasn't provoked, you understand, nor that I disagreed with what he did - the point is that the Martin case is a complex one, not a cut-and-dried one. Which would rather negate the value of a "life" sentence, don't you think? That sounds more reasonable, since manslaughter (if it's the same meaning as it has here in Ireland) is usually where there was no intent to kill, and it would usually be because of something like a traffic accident where you were speeding and hit someone as a result - in other words, an accident which was directly your fault and killed someone as a result.
That does seem the only reasonable response, doesn't it? In the US, this hypothetical guy would be executed.
jps, Unfortunately, this isn't an academic debate Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! It's allready happened.
