36 year old dog walker murdered

[ForTonightGodisaDJ]

in Snow Hill by a 15 and 16 year old. Why have these not been named unlike the killers of Brianna Ghey?

It's got nothing to do with whether it's a hate crime. Brianna Ghey's killers were convicted of murder, with multiple aggravating features. For a start, they deliberately killed her. Secondly, they planned it over a long period. Thirdly, they did it for their personal gratification. Fourthly, they both pleaded not guilty and tried to blame the other one despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

The two killers in this case were convicted of manslaughter, which is a different crime entirely. They didn't intend to kill him, and he actually died well after their attack having discharged himself from hospital. And they both pleaded guilty and shown remorse and regret.

Clearly it was an awful thing to do and a man lost his life. But in sentencing terms it's absolutely nothing like the murder of Brianna Ghey (or James Bulger, or Joe Geeling, or any other premeditated murder carried out by under-18s).

OP has picked BG for a reason, come on OP, say why....

Why don’t you tell us if you are so sure there is an agenda here?

I could barely read that, They bullied the poor man for weeks leading up to murdering him and yes it was murdering my book because he died due to their deliberate actions. I hope they rot.

I assume because the age groups are the same?

A recent incident of teenagers killing someone? Don't think there's any hidden agenda here? Unless you're trying to push some kind of trans agenda?

They won't name them because of vigilantes and they will be released very soon.

The sentences are lower because of manslaughter not murder and a guilty plea. (Probably other factors too but those alone would make a big difference)

The killers of Brianna were named for very specific reasons, as given by the judge at the time. It's very unusual for minors to be named; someone has to request it, it is not just a decision the judge can make off their own bat. In the case of Brianna, the media requested it and the judge granted it as they felt it would be better to name them now, while they were in custody. The idea being that by the time they are released, the media attention will have calmed down. They did this to help make it slightly easier for the families. Completely different than this case (manslaughter vs murder, for a start), and as I say it has to be requested and deemed to be in the public interest.

It's a ridiculously low sentence. Shocking.

Mocking him while he couldn’t breathe - it makes me feel sick. Vile little shits.

Disgusting. No deterrent there.

I just don't understand sentencing in this country. What they did was disgusting and I very much doubt the sentences will have much effect.

Without wanting to derail, the simple official classification of 'hate crime' is outrageous and very misleading.

By all means make it very clear if people commit a crime and target their victim purely because of a protected characteristic and/or position of vulnerability - but vicious crimes like this, where a victim is chosen and brutally attacked with no motive other than 'for fun' or to film it and get views online ARE also 100% perpetrated out of hatred towards the victim; how can they not be?

I would also be conducting exhaustive inquiries into the parenting of criminals like this, and holding their parents equally liable unless there is convincing evidence that they genuinely did all they could to bring their children up with at least a very basic knowledge of how non-feral humans should behave towards other people.

Why worse?

I think it likely that they were not being brought up by their parents.

It's quite obvious that you are the one with an an agenda. Shame on you for exploiting a man's death to push it.

Well, it very strongly appears like they were not being 'brought up' at all by anybody with parental responsibility for them - whether their biological parents or not. I think whoever those people were should be held accountable as well.

I live locally and the perpetrators names were shared widely not long after the incident.

The victim was known as having some learning difficulties, his elderly mother is bereft.

Locals are incandescent at the lenient sentencing these little monsters have recieved. The beasts were well known trouble makers, feral, with parents that don't give a shit about their spawn.

No doubt they will be swaggering about, terrorising people again in a year or two.

A year (or 18m) for being so violent towards someone that they end up dead.

Gleeful, unprovoked violence relished in the moment and proudly shown off afterwards.

The judge said they'll live with the consequences for the rest of their lives. But will they? Youngsters who are that violent and nasty probably weren't aiming for the kind of jobs where you'd be disqualified by a criminal record.

They've got away with murder, so what incentive is there to live a good and useful life?

18 months vs a man's life. What was the judge thinking? Can't help but wonder why they were given such lenient sentences. They'll be out causing trouble in no time at all. It's absolutely no punishment or deterrent.

There will surely be an appeal against the leniency of the sentence.

Judge adheres to sentencing guidelines. He doesn't just pick a sentence out of the air!

Any one can apply for a review
https://www.gov.uk/ask-crown-court-sentence-review
I've just filled in the form.
@HelloMiss
more about sentencing for manslaughter here.

Disgustingly light sentences.
They should be tagged and curfewed after release, hopefully for a few years but I doubt it.