Page 1 of 18 months for killing a family of 6

Not much of a deterrent :(
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/staffordshire/7888653.stm

Maximum sentence was 5 years, he gets 3 but will serve 18 months.

This item was edited on Monday, 16th February 2009, 16:38

Ludicrous.

I`m from Llandudno and although didn`t know them, obviously as it`s local the story gets a lot of press around here, so it`s been followed heavily from the beginning.

www.last.fm/user/1mills

This item was edited on Monday, 16th February 2009, 16:45

As the old saying goes: If you want to kill someone, do it with a car. :(

---

Could someone please
Remove these cutleries
From my knees...

er... mass murder and he get`s 18 months?

wha?

:o

My DVD collection

its a crazy sentencing policy in this country... dont even get me started, i have known people go to court 18 months after serious incidents, and walk out on suspended sentences... meanwhiles hundreds if not more hours have gone into securing the evidence, only for the courts to decided that because in the interim period that person has not offended (sorry been caught offending), that they pose less of a risk, hence suspending the sentence!

The problem is many offenders will chance there arm that the victims will lose faith in the system, and fail to show up at court... thus undermining their case.

The courts can use discretion for early guilty pleas, giving a lesser sentence... what they should be doing is if you fail to go for an early guilty plea, and then plead guilty on the day or are found guilty, then the maximum sentence should be applied by the court... would stop their games!

The victims of the crime, then blame the police... (sorry rant mode off)



`i am going to live forever or die trying`

Quote:
er... mass murder and he get`s 18 months?

FFS, it`s not murder.
If it was murder, he`d get life.
I`m not sticking up for him.
I`m not condoning it.
I don`t think the sentence is right.
I`m just pointing out, in the eyes of the law, it is not murder.
If you think it`s murder, thank f*** you`re not in a position of power.
Causing death is automatically murder?
No degrees?
Do me a f***ing favour.
God forbid I ever do something stupid in my car and kill someone, lest I be banged up the same as someone who`d planned a victim, slashed them up and put their cadavour in a suitcase.
F*** me.
Sorry for the rant, everyone, but FFS.

This item was edited on Monday, 16th February 2009, 17:07

Unbelievably lenient sentence......driving a 40 ton truck on a motorway while looking at a laptop isn`t far off pre-meditated as far as I`m concerned.

We have far too many dangerous foreign trucks on our roads and nowhere near enough traffic police to stop more accidents happening. If you have a minor shunt involving a foreign truck thats not your fault your insurance company will not even bother to chase them for the money as it`s too much hassle.

I give them as wide a berth as possible on the motorway.


Quote:
Andrew Thomas QC, prosecuting, had told the jury there was a possibility that at the time of the crash Da Silva was using a global positioning system on his laptop computer to work out an alternative route.

Relatives give their reaction to Da Silva`s sentence
Da Silva denied using the computer while he was driving, but police found it by the driver`s seat with the screen turned to face the driver.



why take life so seriously..its not like you are going to make it out alive

We don`t have a vehicular manslaughter charge unlike some other countries. As Bowfer mentioned it isn`t murder as he didn`t plan to kill the family.

I don`t agree with it and think that stronger sentences need applying but the law needs changing for that to be possible.

Nick

Quote:
, only for the courts to decided that because in the interim period that person has not offended (sorry been caught offending), that they pose less of a risk, hence suspending the sentence!

Or in Joey Barton`s case, get charged with something else in the interim period and actually serve a prison sentence for it and still get suspended sentence for the first offence due to good behaviour since the first offence..........

www.last.fm/user/1mills

This item was edited on Monday, 16th February 2009, 18:45

Bowfer you are wrong. It was murder, like it or not, law or not. MURDER. He was using his computer to alter his route. He knew the consequence of not concentrating, once he started using the computer he knew what he was doing could lead to someone being killed, just as sure if you point a gun at someone & fire it that could lead to someone being killed. No different. Murder plain & simple MURDER.