Ethics: What do you think of this case?

[G.T.]

Thug jailed for manslaughter after his victim died 17 years on from attack

Summary: A man punched another man in a dispute over chicks, after leaving a bar.

The Victim was paralyzed.

The assailant went to Prison and served his time for the assault/paralysis.


17 years later, the paralyzed man died. The assailant was sent BACK to Prison, for Manslaughter.


I'm interested in all of the perspectives, on this.

Thanks!!

 

[anynameyouwish]

Thug jailed for manslaughter after his victim died 17 years on from attack

Summary: A man punched another man in a dispute over chicks, after leaving a bar.

The Victim was paralyzed.

The assailant went to Prison and served his time for the assault/paralysis.


17 years later, the paralyzed man died. The assailant was sent BACK to Prison, for Manslaughter.


I'm interested in all of the perspectives, on this.

Thanks!!

tough one.

If the guy had died within 3 years .....I guess I would agree to manslaughter....

but after 17?

I don't think so.

 

[G.T.]

Thug jailed for manslaughter after his victim died 17 years on from attack

Summary: A man punched another man in a dispute over chicks, after leaving a bar.

The Victim was paralyzed.

The assailant went to Prison and served his time for the assault/paralysis.


17 years later, the paralyzed man died. The assailant was sent BACK to Prison, for Manslaughter.


I'm interested in all of the perspectives, on this.

Thanks!!

tough one.

If the guy had died within 3 years .....I guess I would agree to manslaughter....

but after 17?

I don't think so.

So 3 is the point of reason-ability? Hmm, I guess I can see that. I might even stretch it to five, as we can still correlate a pretty direct result of the punch that way.

17 years just seems so crazy. I mean, the death is DUE to the paralysis, but we already KNOW paralysis leads to sooner Death and you'd think the judge would have factored that in in the FIRST sentencing.

 

[ding]

Thug jailed for manslaughter after his victim died 17 years on from attack

Summary: A man punched another man in a dispute over chicks, after leaving a bar.

The Victim was paralyzed.

The assailant went to Prison and served his time for the assault/paralysis.


17 years later, the paralyzed man died. The assailant was sent BACK to Prison, for Manslaughter.


I'm interested in all of the perspectives, on this.

Thanks!!

That’s one of the problems of a letter of the law society.

We enforce the letter of the law. Of course the other problem is that we tend to only follow the letter of the law.

 

[Jitss617]

Apparently he wasn't a remorseful for the attack ..

If you can’t admit it was a mistake, you were drunk, then Yes go do the 2 years.. you want to be a tough guy.
I got into a fight knocked the guy out the cops came and gave me a ride to where I was going lol
We laughed about it.. but this guy could be all fucked up now because I knocked him out..
O well..

 

[rightwinger]

Thug jailed for manslaughter after his victim died 17 years on from attack

Summary: A man punched another man in a dispute over chicks, after leaving a bar.

The Victim was paralyzed.

The assailant went to Prison and served his time for the assault/paralysis.


17 years later, the paralyzed man died. The assailant was sent BACK to Prison, for Manslaughter.


I'm interested in all of the perspectives, on this.

Thanks!!

Looks like double jeopardy

The prospect of a potential shorter life should have been addressed in his first trial

 

[G.T.]

Thug jailed for manslaughter after his victim died 17 years on from attack

Summary: A man punched another man in a dispute over chicks, after leaving a bar.

The Victim was paralyzed.

The assailant went to Prison and served his time for the assault/paralysis.


17 years later, the paralyzed man died. The assailant was sent BACK to Prison, for Manslaughter.


I'm interested in all of the perspectives, on this.

Thanks!!

Looks like double jeopardy

The prospect of a potential shorter life should have been addressed in his first trial

Yeah, I'm starting to lean this way conceptually. If the Judge fucked up and didn't include the shortened life-span in their first determination, then that's on the Judge. The man served the sentence, that makes him square with the Law to go ahead and start anew. Not sure why this flies, exactly.

 

[Moonglow]

You do understand that they decided that double jeopardy was not unconstitutional...Just like due process and asset forfeiture?

 

[martybegan]

Thug jailed for manslaughter after his victim died 17 years on from attack

Summary: A man punched another man in a dispute over chicks, after leaving a bar.

The Victim was paralyzed.

The assailant went to Prison and served his time for the assault/paralysis.


17 years later, the paralyzed man died. The assailant was sent BACK to Prison, for Manslaughter.


I'm interested in all of the perspectives, on this.

Thanks!!

I would be OK with it if they included the time served for the assault as part of the sentence for manslaughter.

 

[G.T.]

You do understand that they decided that double jeopardy was not unconstitutional...Just like due process and asset forfeiture?

It wasn't me that invoked the double jeopardy thingy...but I will say that all red tape aside, I think that I guess I do consider this second sentence unethical.

 

[Moonglow]

You do understand that they decided that double jeopardy was not unconstitutional...Just like due process and asset forfeiture?

It wasn't me that invoked the double jeopardy thingy...but I will say that all red tape aside, I think that I guess I do consider this second sentence unethical.

I do also yet the people in power have decided to improve on their abilities to punish without conviction and continually harass over allegations, along with a lifelong ability to pull up criminality for punishment.

 

[Care4all]

You do understand that they decided that double jeopardy was not unconstitutional...Just like due process and asset forfeiture?

Holy Toledo!

Welcome Back Moonglow!!!

That was a long vacation!

 

[Moonglow]

You do understand that they decided that double jeopardy was not unconstitutional...Just like due process and asset forfeiture?

Holy Toledo!

Welcome Back Moonglow!!!

That was a long vacation!

Yes indeed I was able to make dolls for pins of all the Mods..

 

[JoeMoma]

A good lawyer should be able to get him off on appeal because of double jeopardy.

 

[Care4all]

You do understand that they decided that double jeopardy was not unconstitutional...Just like due process and asset forfeiture?

Holy Toledo!

Welcome Back Moonglow!!!

That was a long vacation!

Yes indeed I was able to make dolls for pins of all the Mods..

 

[norwegen]

Thug jailed for manslaughter after his victim died 17 years on from attack

Summary: A man punched another man in a dispute over chicks, after leaving a bar.

The Victim was paralyzed.

The assailant went to Prison and served his time for the assault/paralysis.


17 years later, the paralyzed man died. The assailant was sent BACK to Prison, for Manslaughter.


I'm interested in all of the perspectives, on this.

Thanks!!

Looks like double jeopardy

The prospect of a potential shorter life should have been addressed in his first trial

Yeah, I'm starting to lean this way conceptually. If the Judge fucked up and didn't include the shortened life-span in their first determination, then that's on the Judge. The man served the sentence, that makes him square with the Law to go ahead and start anew. Not sure why this flies, exactly.

So sentences should be meted according to possibilities?

If the victim died from his injuries and manslaughter convictions typically earn sentences of more than 17 years, then yea, the thug should go back to prison and serve out the rest of the manslaughter sentence.

 

[G.T.]

Thug jailed for manslaughter after his victim died 17 years on from attack

Summary: A man punched another man in a dispute over chicks, after leaving a bar.

The Victim was paralyzed.

The assailant went to Prison and served his time for the assault/paralysis.


17 years later, the paralyzed man died. The assailant was sent BACK to Prison, for Manslaughter.


I'm interested in all of the perspectives, on this.

Thanks!!

Looks like double jeopardy

The prospect of a potential shorter life should have been addressed in his first trial

Yeah, I'm starting to lean this way conceptually. If the Judge fucked up and didn't include the shortened life-span in their first determination, then that's on the Judge. The man served the sentence, that makes him square with the Law to go ahead and start anew. Not sure why this flies, exactly.

So sentences should be meted according to possibilities?

If the victim died from his injuries and manslaughter convictions typically earn sentences of more than 17 years, then yea, the thug should go back to prison and serve out the rest of the manslaughter sentence.

Science already elucidates that paralysis causes an early Death. It's the Negligence of the Judge to have excluded this proper analysis in his/her first Judgment.

Impending imprisonment for 17+ years or however many more it would have taken for the Victim to have died is irrational.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Thug jailed for manslaughter after his victim died 17 years on from attack

Summary: A man punched another man in a dispute over chicks, after leaving a bar.

The Victim was paralyzed.

The assailant went to Prison and served his time for the assault/paralysis.


17 years later, the paralyzed man died. The assailant was sent BACK to Prison, for Manslaughter.


I'm interested in all of the perspectives, on this.

Thanks!!

If his death was directly linked to damage caused by the assault, then it seems reasonable enough to me.

 

[Cecilie1200]

A good lawyer should be able to get him off on appeal because of double jeopardy.

Seems like a lot of people here don't understand double jeopardy.

He can't be charged with the same crime twice; doesn't mean he can't be charged with two different crimes in relation to the same act. First time, he was charged with assault, apparently. This time, he's charged with manslaughter, which is a different crime.

 

[JoeMoma]

A good lawyer should be able to get him off on appeal because of double jeopardy.

Seems like a lot of people here don't understand double jeopardy.

He can't be charged with the same crime twice; doesn't mean he can't be charged with two different crimes in relation to the same act. First time, he was charged with assault, apparently. This time, he's charged with manslaughter, which is a different crime.

So after he serves his time for manslaughter, he can be tried and convicted for first degree murder?

I understand your point. I still believe a good lawyer cam make a case based on double jeopardy and win. Why? Because assault, manslaughter, and Murder and usually considered differ levels of charges for the same act (crime). Usually someone is convicted on just one of these levels for the same act, not multiple levels.