Student protester jailed
- Thread starter No1newts
- Start date
Sure if he was being done with vandalism fixing the dmg/paying for it would be fine in my book as long as it was ok with the property owner
But this isn't vandalism is it?
found it
LOL waits for him to comment.
found it
<quotes superewza and his 'government plant theory'>
hahahaha. fantastic.
"Attempting to drop a heavy weight on an innocent persons head" is attempted murder Please refrain from personal insults, however minor. VS.
Again, people are sentenced based on the crimes they commit, or planned to commit (pre-meditation), not "what if he dropped it and it exploded and killed everyone in a 10m radius???"
Its no different to firing a gun at someone and missing their head by a few inches, 3 months? Don't be stupid.
3 years is quite light for attempted murder.
I don't suppose it would make much difference to your train of thought to know that he was convicted of "violent disorder", not attempted murder? It might also come as a bit of a shock to know that at no point was he ever charged with anything that comes close to murder, because - shocking as it may seem - people are charged with offences they commit as opposed to "what if".
Intent plays a large part. Section 18 and section 20 deal with GBH crimes, but note that 18 is with Intent and carries a much higher penalty (note I am not saying this guy is guilty of GBH , I am using the differences between GBH and GBH with intent to reinforce the argument that a stiffer sentence is required if it was done with intent)
From Section 20 of the Offences Against The Person Act 1861.
I quote "Whosoever shall unlawfully and maliciously wound or inflict any grievous bodily harm upon any other person, either with or without any weapon or instrument, shall be guilty of an offence and, being convicted therefore, shall be liable to a term of imprisonment not exceeding five years."
This differs from Section 18
"Whosoever shall unlawfully and maliciously by any means whatsoever wound or cause any grievous bodily harm to any person, with intent to do some grievous bodily harm to any person, or with intent to resist or prevent the lawful apprehension or detainer of any person, shall be guilty of an offence and, being convicted thereof, shall be liable to imprisonment for life."
So if the judge deemed that this student threw that extinguisher off the top of the building with the intent of doing someone harm, then he would likely impose a stiffer sentence than if he though it was hi-jinx gone wrong / caught up in the heat of the moment.
This guy must have carried that fire extinguisher from within the building to the roof, with the intention of throwing it. Therefore he had obviously worked this out. If it was a case of he found some debris / roof tiles up there and in the heat of protest grabbed on and threw it that could be seen as heat of moment. The fact that he brought the fire extinguisher up to the roof with him shows he was intending / planning to throw it.
You're right - intent plays a bit part in sentencing. I agree with everything you've said there and can only surmise that the sentence handed out is either meant as "a deterrent to everyone else" (which I think is harsh) or that the judge thought there was intent to injure/kill.
It is a pretty stupid thing to do. I can remember seeing it when it was live on the news.
If he got 3 months i guess he would come out feeling 'cool'.
3 years is seriously going to have an impact on him and make him think, as well as making other people think too.
But i also feel disappointed that the rapists and murderers often get away with easier sentences for their crimes.
If he got 3 months i guess he would come out feeling 'cool'.
3 years is seriously going to have an impact on him and make him think, as well as making other people think too.
But i also feel disappointed that the rapists and murderers often get away with easier sentences for their crimes.
it only 'appears' to be heavy handed because some of the more hardcore crimes like rapists, paedophiles, killers, assault with deadly weapons etc, seem to get such lenient terms compared to this.
If all murders got locked up for life as in they come out in a wooden box and all rapists got 15 years and all paedophiles got say 10 years + chemical castration, this sentence would appear as about right, which it probably is.
Why are people saying the sentence was harsh? The guy will probably only serve 1/2 of the term, which works out at 1 year and 4 months, and on top of that I don't even think he's going to a full blown prison.
Just over a year for nearly killing a police officer. Yeah that's REALLY harsh
Just over a year for nearly killing a police officer. Yeah that's REALLY harsh
He goes to the college just up the road from me.
Some sob story from his mum yesterday about how she hopes he isn't used as an example and how she hopes it hasn't ruined his life. Well, perhaps he should have thought about that before he almost ruined someone elses life!
She went on to say how much of a nice person he his, etc, etc.
Some sob story from his mum yesterday about how she hopes he isn't used as an example and how she hopes it hasn't ruined his life. Well, perhaps he should have thought about that before he almost ruined someone elses life!
She went on to say how much of a nice person he his, etc, etc.
It's not attempted murder it's violent disorder. At least that's he's been sentenced for.
It's violent disorder, same as smashing up a restaurant.
Last edited: