7 years for a life

I think most normal people would agree. These kids are not fit for purpose they will never be an asset to society and their kids will be even more feral

Sorry if this offends anybody, but I completely agree

They deserve the death penalty. Scum like this are of no use to society and should not live among decent people. Scum.

Another one that made me cry reading it.

There has been another case in the old Bailey today 3 feral girls killed a 75 years old Colombian chap getting off a bus. These parents need to be named and shamed kids need to be punished harshly

This country is absolutely pathetic for sentencing crime. I feel sad for this man and his family. His life was precious and those vile kids shouldn't have a chance at any years of decent life after doing that but he will get out and have most of his adulthood ahead of him. What a disgrace.

The sentence is pathetic even for a chatge of manslaughter, which can carry a life term.

I sometimes see the sentences and think I could do the time myself if someone did this to mine ☹️.

Agree with this. These scumbags will have been dragged up

You know what stupid decisions I made as an adolescent? I kissed a boy who had a girlfriend, I used a fake ID to buy some cider and got drunk in a field, I once graffitied on a bus stop, I bunked off school and I was rude to my parents. I never randomly decided to murder a pensioner though, in fact nothing I did hurt another human being, this goes beyond a teenager being rebellious or making "mistakes"

Forseeability and appreciation of consequences of acts are what I remember from reading law a long time ago. The degree of culpability in murder has different layers; a complex area of law. CPS probably thought the threshold for manslaughter was easier to prove.

the police knew about racist attacks in that area but did nothing - that gave permission for this cruel attack. Its heartbreaking that his own family where the ones to find him - so close. I hope they can appeal the sentence. Its too short especially the girls - what message does it give to the children round there?

He didn't need to have the intention to kill the man, just the intent to cause him serious harm.

Manslaughter could also have been offered as an alternative verdict to murder if a jury had doubts about a murder conviction.

It would interesting to hear a criminal lawyer's take on this, but I find it difficult to see from the outside why you wouldn't pursue murder, with the possibility of manslaughter open to the jury.

Murder is a difficult charge to prove but the sentence is still pathetic. The boy was 15, old enough to know right from wrong. It was only a few decades ago 15 years old left school and went to work.
Yes he’ll be out in 3 years and I doubt this piece of human excrement will have any remorse.

I understand what you're saying, and I'm sure that from a legal perspective, you're absolutely right. But the victim was visibly very frail, and it's hardly rocket science that he would be significantly more vulnerable. I honestly find it very hard to believe that the perpetrator didn't realise that he was going to kill the poor man, even if that wasn't his explicit intent at the outset.

Being "... clearly old enough to understand what they were doing" is irrelevant to the distinction between murder and manslaughter.

To get a murder conviction you have to convince a jury that the defendant's actions were taken with the express intention of doing harm so serious it would end the victim's life.

It is extremely unlikely that this boy set out with the intention to kill the man that day, and even less likely that a jury would be convinced of that.

The victim suffered catastrophic injuries largely because he was incredibly frail, rather than purely due to the severity/duration of the attack. The boy kicked him, punched him to the ground and hit him with his flip-flop.

If he'd have kicked his head around like a football, stamped on his neck, stabbed him in the chest etc, it may have been different. But the reality is that it's often difficult to prove pre-meditation (as it should be) and as a result, manslaughter is seen as a much safe route when there's doubt involved.

Murder is unlawful killing but only requires the intent to cause serious harm, not necessarily the the intent to kill. If that serious harm is death then it is murder.

I think it would have been a hard sell to suggest that the delightful individuals involved did not intend to cause serious harm, as such the manslaughter charges would seem to be nothing more than a convenient way to reduce the sentences possibly because of their age.

She should have her phone taken off her as well
Stupid parents probably bought that phone and she's using it to film violence.
How low can society go.

Exactly, it's people with views that like that bring up these feral kids. And to think this poster keeps trying to justify their views but hasn't yet once commented on the many posts which ask if they would feel the same if it was their husband, son, father or grandfather, who was brutally killed.

Reminds me of the mum on here, who posted to ask whether she should complain about a female teacher who was trying to hold her son back, because he'd got a gang and tried to beat up another child. The teacher was brave and did nothing wrong yet this woman could not see. Too many people who should not be having kids, having kids (usually with the state funding their lifestyles) and many being affected by their behaviour.

A good sentence? He’ll be getting out just as he reaches adulthood, not remotely rehabilitated, and ready to begin his life as an abusive, violent man in earnest. This wasn’t a ‘mistake’ or a ‘stupid decision’. It was a vicious, calculated, cowardly attack by a pair of feral, racist kids. They should both be locked up for a couple of decades. And they should both be named so that those members of the public who don’t want to get beaten to death while walking the dog know to avoid them.

You think beating a pensioner, breaking his neck and killing him is ‘a mistake’? A ‘stupid decision’? That’s why so many kids are feral. Because they have people like you defending them. He should get life. You think being 14 is a mitigating factor? Did you beat pensioners as a 14 year old teenager?

Pair of utter bastards. Hope they eventually get what they deserve…

They should be named and shamed.

Those decisions don't normally involve beating a pensioner to death.
How do.this act as a deterrent to anyone else.

Appalling low sentences. Like that kid who smashed his teacher's head into a concrete floor and got no custodial time at all. Because he has ADHD. Despite saying she deserved it.

RIP Mr Kohli.

They are raging.

Murder requires intent.
You could punch somebody they slip, hit their
head and die. I cannot see why that would earn the death penalty.