Separate names with a comma.
Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.
Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' at netrider.net.au started by jdkarmch, Sep 25, 2007.
Background to this case Here
MRAA media release sent today:
Well 20 months is not enough, so I will look at the penalty differences from a % perspective. So for drink driving involving death you get about 120% more penalty than you would for disobeying a give way sign, sounds right to me. :?
It's sad whatever way you look at it. but 20 months is not enough.
Car thief - should have had his hands chopped off before it came to this anyway.
Shoot him and bill his family for the bullet.
Failing that; hell yes you appeal the feather-weight sentence.
Yeah when i saw the story i was mortified!
I cant believe a judge (female to top it off) thought that 20 months was an adequate enough sentence for some bogan tool who killed a father of 3
They reported he also had 13 or so "priors" :?
Seriously WTF is going on???
But it wasn't his fault, he was under emotional strain/financial crisis/work stress/had a bad sub for lunch etc.
He should have been given another chance, you know, so he'd be rehabilitated out of his ways, everyone deserves another eleventy billion chances.
Problem is, everyone is running around trying to get career fcukwits to change their ways with some counselling etc, and it just doesn't work.
its absolute s*%t that people go under punished for crimes
unfortunately an eye for an eye will make the world go blind
rubbish!... makes the system look like a joke... granted we don't know the full facts, but on the basis of moral judgement, punishment does not fit the crime
Ahh comrade Klutu-Tsing, we adopt Chinese way no?
Seriously, i agree. This guy should be permanently banned and jailed for at least 3-5! (Won't happen, but nice thought!)
Or it would change peoples perspective...........
It has it's merits :grin:
Tramp, you may be able to answer this question? Is there some sort of reluctance in the court system to apply manslaughter in road related deaths? I would have thought in this case given he left the scene of the crime and the bloke subsequently died, it would be fairly clear cut.
He should get more than that length of time for being a "serial" car thief! He's obviously a slow learner (or just does not care). I'd consider being a bit lenient if he would have stopped and helped after hitting the rider - accidents do happen, but just leaving him is piss poor. Hang him high I say - scum like this dont deserve any more chances!
There has always been a reluctance. The problem is that we have juries and juries always have drivers in em. And drivers (especially not particularily good ones who have bent a few cars ) tend to think "There but for the grace of God......" So you charge em with manslaughter at least one bloke in the jury is going to think .. "Bit stiff, that could have been me... " and refuse to convict. So he gets off.
This is the reason culpable driving was bought in originally. To give juries a lesser charge than Manslaughter to convict on.
Here's the original thread on this collision.
The interesting thing about the original thread was that people were talking about Martinez getting charged with Culpable Driving - which would have meant a 4 - 6 year sentence.
As it turns out Martinez was charged with Dangerous Driving Causing Death and Failure to Render Assistance - both lesser offences which resulted in the lesser sentence. Who knows what the Police were doing when they decided on this charge rather than Culpable.
I also note that not one rider (other than the one that asked the MRAA to issue a media release) has made the effort to write to the media or phone in to talk back radio.
To remind those who want to make the effort, here are media outlets that you can email:
email@example.com - Derryn Hinch is one who frequently gets upset by lenient sentencing
Over to you guys - the MRAA has taken this as far as they can for now. If none of you are prepared to get upset and communicate your concern to the media - then its "let's wait for it to happen again...."
Thanks for the clarification. Still, what more do you need for culpable driving than in this case????
Gold Andrew, pure gold !!
How do you know this? I for one believe that there may have been many people who tried to speak up but whether or not the media chooses to publish/broadcast is another story all together...
Geez, don't ask me. I think its exactly why we have culpable driving. And personely I wouldnt have been the bloke acquiting on the jury. (To be fair thats my opinion at this advanced age.. I don't really know but maybe my opinion was different when I was 20)
I,m just telling you the history.