To feel sorry for (and think the punishment is too long) for the 18 year old who threw the fire extinguisher in the protests

[LaurieFairyonthetreeEatsCake]

2 years, 8 months in jail

here

That's a looooong time. Is the reasoning supposed to be that it's a deterrent?

There are people with asbo's who cause no end of trouble and don't get sentences like this.

I am going to [sigh] as well. Not getting back into the explanations of the sentencing process as I can't be bothered any more. And NetworkGuy is doing a good, solid job of putting forward the common sense arguments.

But, and for the absolute last time. YOU CANNOT GET 2 YEARS FOR MURDER.

Seriously. Look it up. Just google "murder". You can get 2 years or 18 months or whatever for manslaughter. If someone is charged with manslaughter then it means the CPS were satisfied that intent could not be proved. If you want to indulge in wild speculation about intent and infer a murderous act from a manslaughter conviction then that is, of course, entirely a matter for you. You could be right. Or you could be entirely wrong and in a worse position to make that judgement than the CPS lawyer who had to make the charging decision.

I don't know how many previous threads there may have been concerning murder/ manslaughter in a 'domestic' situation, but while comparisons are 'of interest' they surely belong in a separate thread, and perhaps it's an issue which (if put concisely) could be used to start an MN Campaign for a change in the attitude of Police, CPS and the justice system in its entirety, so harsher sentences would be expected where a 'domestic' ends up with ABH, GBH or death.

I know sakura has strong views (those shared by others, too) and I'd never argue that where a death or injury is concerned, it isn't serious nor would I try to argue there should be little or no punishment, but those situations are quite different to the subject of this thread (and I'd expect unanimous agreement that where sentencing is concerned, some men appear to have been treated to minimal punishment when they have caused a death).

YABVVU It was only luck that it missed the police offices below, it brushed the clothing of one of them as it fell. He got what he deserved IMHO. His actions, and those of the other out of control destructive idiots make reasonable demonstrations more problematic for the rest of us in the future. They are a bunch of self indulgent w*nkers who have an overinflated sense of entitlement.

sakura, murder carries a mandatory life sentence-no point arguing about that, it does. Of course, that does not mean every murder serves life, as we all know.

The sentencing judge can set a 'tarif' i.e. minimum term. The convicted person cannot be considered for release before this date, so s/he effectively serves a sentence somewhere between the tarif and life, depending on the individual case and parole applications. Tarifs are often too low, in many people's opinion.

Manslaughter carries a maximum term of life imprisonment, but as you've noticed sentences are often a lot lower.

Sentences can be low and are often clearly too low for offences of violence, particularly by men on their female partners.

You and I AGREE on this issue, broadly. There is a scandal of violence against women in this society which is simply not addressed as it should be at any level from family and community through to police and courts.

I have to say, if you feel that strongly about it then you should do more than base your arguments on the brief, usually inaccurate and always sensationalist media reports.

Telling the court his wife threw plates at him (to quote your example) is not the same as the court accepting that she did, let alone agreeing that it is a defence or a mitigating factor. If you really want to know how and why people are sentenced as they are stop cutting and pasting tabloid drivel on forums. Instead, go out and sit in on cases in your nearest Crown Court or start reading proper case reports on things like the bailli website of court cases.

Do you just want a soapbox or do you want to understand what actually happens?

NetworkGuy is right, sorry for hijack.

Smallwhitecat - i talk out of my mouth not my arse thanks! I'm no academic + can't argue finer points of law. All i know is what i and most people i know think which is that people who commit or intend to commit harm should get put away and punished properly.
The case i referred to poss was manslaughter - but 2 years is nothing for a life.
The lad throwing the fire extinguisher committed a pre-meditated act of violence by illegally entering a building, finding an object likely to kill/maim and throwing it at people from the roof. What a nice individual.
Re: the police - i know some very good officers but they say some are clearly in the job because they're on a power trip. I would like to see the injuries caused some of the police properly investigated and punished as well.

I have been thinking about this thread and I feel I can articulate my point better now.

The fact that murder is a life sentence is a red herring when so many men are getting away with killing their wives and getting sent down for just a few years because they pull out the manslaughter 'I didn't mean it' card in court.

People should be taught from a very early age, that if you punch someone, or beat them, there is a likelihood you will kill them. If you punched a 90 year old man clean in the face, he would probably die. If you punched a 3 year old in the face, it too would probably die.

BUt women are punched like this by their spouses all the time. They are used as punchbags but because of their strong constitution, and possibly their youth, they continue to survive.
Twice a week a woman succumbs to her partner's death blows and dies.
In court, the muderer (and I will continue to call them murderers) says that because he didn't intend to kill her (he wanted to continue to beat her up for a few more years) then it's not murder. It's manslaughter.

This is a serious loophole in the law.

ANyone who punches someone in the face should be tried for murder, whether or not their victim happens to have been lucky enough to survive the assault or not.

As a society, we are condoning these murderers by suggesting that because they chose the right victim- a woman in her prime- they are less of a killer. She should have survived his attack, therefore he is automatically not a murderer.

This is a faulty mindset that I would like to see changed.

18 months, two years for a woman's life is not enough, no matter what was going through her murderers head at the time he killed her. He may not have meant to kill her, which makes it manslaughter in the eyes of the law. We have become so desensitised to violence that we buy this nonsense about men not meaning to kill their spouses.

SO, my starting point is this: If you punch someone in the head, you are going to kill them. If they didn't die, you got lucky.

well worded sakura