PragueBlue
Well-Known Member
I always remember that one too!
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
A34 closed | 30 year old man murdered after traffic light "altercation"
- Thread starter denislawsbackheel
- Start date
mancityvstoke
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 15 Apr 2009
- Messages
- 22,062
- Location
- Vintage terraced Kippax
- Team supported
- The only football team to come from Manchester
say it how it is Inda.....lolHe’ll be crying for his mum when he’s getting creamed up the dirt box , big gangsters till they get in the big house and see what real gangsters are like
fuck going to prison...it isn't nice at all
gordondaviesmoustache
Well-Known Member
Donoghue v Stevenson is a classic!Yep, it does, always good to have the input of someone who understands the law.
I did basic law in my HND course many years ago, as it was Business Studies it was mostly Contract and Tort related. I don’t remember too much (it was 47 years ago) but one of the first cases we studied (and probably everyone else who’s done law) was Donoghue v Stevenson, Snail in a Ginger beer bottle. A far cry from the murder (or manslaughter :-;) being discussed in this thread!
Blue Maverick
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 6 Aug 2010
- Messages
- 21,768
Why do they say life then put a number on it, I’ve never got that, life to me is life.Even if it is manslaughter, the maximum tariff is life, which is what this guy should get, if proven.
Just been reading an article about a guy who got 7 years for stabbing someone in a street fight in a Sheffield though, so that could be what he gets.
Alan Harper's Tash
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Dec 2010
- Messages
- 59,978
GDM will be able to answer that better than I, but from my understanding, it’s a sentence that allows parole to be considered after a set amount of time, but dependent on behaviour and the risk to the public.Why do they say life then put a number on it, I’ve never got that, life to me is life.
Uncle Wally One Ball
Well-Known Member
Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball is the one I always remember from my law A levelYep, it does, always good to have the input of someone who understands the law.
I did basic law in my HND course many years ago, as it was Business Studies it was mostly Contract and Tort related. I don’t remember too much (it was 47 years ago) but one of the first cases we studied (and probably everyone else who’s done law) was Donoghue v Stevenson, Snail in a Ginger beer bottle. A far cry from the murder (or manslaughter :-;) being discussed in this thread!
Uncle Wally One Ball
Well-Known Member
They are on life licences even after release, usuallyWhy do they say life then put a number on it, I’ve never got that, life to me is life.
the blue panther
Well-Known Member
Rylands v Fletcher; you can't beat a good escape of a dangerous thing.Donoghue v Stevenson is a classic!
On the 'nonce' point, surprised at a suspended sentence for "Cat. A" stuff; very lucky guy - maybe there was a health issue involved. It's hard to give valid comment without knowing the full facts of a case. Most of the nonce reports I see get time for the more serious stuff. Problem is, we need more prison spaces, and this may well be a factor.
gordondaviesmoustache
Well-Known Member
I think there’s been a tendency, since that type of offending became relatively commonplace, to impose community orders/suspended sentences for people who download images if it’s their first offence.Rylands v Fletcher; you can't beat a good escape of a dangerous thing.
On the 'nonce' point, surprised at a suspended sentence for "Cat. A" stuff; very lucky guy - maybe there was a health issue involved. It's hard to give valid comment without knowing the full facts of a case. Most of the nonce reports I see get time for the more serious stuff. Problem is, we need more prison spaces, and this may well be a factor.
The logic is that it is the type of offending that is capable of rehabilitation and for many of those convicted their lives are ruined anyway and sending them to prison isn’t therefore necessary given the pressure on resources. That’s the logic, anyway.
So it’s not a recent development.
PragueBlue
Well-Known Member
I remember that one too now that you mention it.Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball is the one I always remember from my law A level