Your The Judge

[GrandOldTeam]

Right, your a judge. Sentence these two cases;

Case One;

A 38-year-old mother, left her 20-month-old daughter alone in a house. The 20-month-old baby was deliberately put in a rear upstairs bedroom so she could not attract any attention or be heard crying. The mother was known to social services and it wasn't the first time she had left children home alone.

During this one instance of the daughter being left alone, an electrical fire broke out and the baby died.

Friends of the mother have also confirmed that she asked them to lie and claim they had been looking after the child in her absense.

Sentence her.

Case Two;

An 18-year-old girl was found guilty of causing death by dangerous driving.

While driving at up to twice the speed limit on a winding 30mph road, she span out of control and crashed in wet conditions, with her front seat passenger, an 18-year-old man, being thrown out of the car and dying from his injuries.

Although the police never took a breath test, the woman was returning from a night out and strongly suspected to have been over the drink drive limit. The passenger was also found to have cocaine in his system.

The woman also lied about being the driver, claiming the deceased passenger was the driver - but forensic experts proved she was indeed, the driver.

Sentence her.

 

[Dylan]

Trying to stir the hornets nest or are we doing homework for you??

Case 1:

Lots of jail time.

Case 2:

Gets community service. Such is the legal system, no sobriety test, no BAC test.

 

[Seamus Colemole]

Do we sentence according to what we think they would get under current British law or what we think they should get?

 

[Latch]

Posted via Mobile Device The way things are now with court system - case 1 suspended sentence - case 2 fine

 

[Nebbiolo]

Case 1 is really about a very selfish, or at least self-absorbed, person. I don't know what charge was brought against her. My reckoning is something relating to causing death by reckless behaviour, and abandonment of an infant. But you're the expert as regards the practical application of the law. I've studied law philosophically; that is, I've investigated questions regarding what law is, what we want from it, whether law should uphold moral values, or whether it is merely there to prevent harm to others.

But anyway, my immediate instinct is that this woman was feckless in the extreme. She abandoned her child, and unless it can be shown that she lacks some type of understanding regarding the potential harms of doing so, is guilty of something (your charge, remember). I'd be looking at a custodial sentence assuming she is fit to stand trial. Would 7 years be lenient or would it be tyrannical?

The second case is different. It could well be a case of panic. A young person, full of high-spirits, immune from the dangers of life, goes out and makes a wrong decision. She lies to the police because she's immediately placed in a position that suggests she needs to protect herself. There was not a premeditated attempt at a crime (as with 1), nor was there a reason to assume that her actions were putting life at risk. Again, this is your charge, not mine. But knowing what I know, I would expect a non-custodial sentence. I think she's probably suffered enough.

 

[little curly alan ball]

1st case . Life the bitch . Should never have been let near any kids , and such pre planning turns my stomach . All for a night out . You skank .

2nd . Sorry to be ex-claims manager , but the issue of speeding is notoriously difficult to prove . In the absence of a Police speed gun , it is non admissable , as is Cctv . Thus , she shouldve been tested but as she wasnt , the worst you can do her for is , perhaps , careless driving . However , the passenger could well be argued to have been contributory , ie , off his cake .
Unlikely custodial .

All rise in the Court , ...

 

[NeoNaoNeo]

Before I read it, if this is your Jury duty and you're asking us you can get put away for that you know

 

[lukecrossland]

Right, your a judge. Sentence these two cases;

Case One;

A 38-year-old mother, left her 20-month-old daughter alone in a house. The 20-month-old baby was deliberately put in a rear upstairs bedroom so she could not attract any attention or be heard crying. The mother was known to social services and it wasn't the first time she had left children home alone.

During this one instance of the daughter being left alone, an electrical fire broke out and the baby died.

Friends of the mother have also confirmed that she asked them to lie and claim they had been looking after the child in her absense.

Sentence her.

Case Two;

An 18-year-old girl was found guilty of causing death by dangerous driving.

While driving at up to twice the speed limit on a winding 30mph road, she span out of control and crashed in wet conditions, with her front seat passenger, an 18-year-old man, being thrown out of the car and dying from his injuries.

Although the police never took a breath test, the woman was returning from a night out and strongly suspected to have been over the drink drive limit. The passenger was also found to have cocaine in his system.

The woman also lied about being the driver, claiming the deceased passenger was the driver - but forensic experts proved she was indeed, the driver.

Sentence her.

Case 1
One person has died. The mother was not at fault as she didn't start the fire. I therefore think that she should be charged for manslaughter. Sentences run from a suspended sentence to life. I would go with 3 year for neglect and perverting the course of justice.

Case 2
Once again only 1 person has died. This time, the driver was proven to be the reason for the death, although it was not premeditated so manslaughter again. Drink driving is often points, but death by dangerous driving can have short sentences. I would give her 5 years but think she would get less.

Now i know people will look at it and see that the first case was a child so will be worse. I see it as 2 lives and disregard the ages involved. The topics are very emotive and both are at the desecration of the judge.

Do we know what the real sentences were?

 

[Seamus Colemole]

Do they get punished for their crime or for the consequences of their crime?

The answer to that strongly determines whatever punishment they get.

Tricky question.

 

[Nebbiolo]

Case 1
One person has died. The mother was not at fault as she didn't start the fire. I therefore think that she should be charged for manslaughter. Sentences run from a suspended sentence to life. I would go with 3 year for neglect and perverting the course of justice.

Case 2
Once again only 1 person has died. This time, the driver was proven to be the reason for the death, although it was not premeditated so manslaughter again. Drink driving is often points, but death by dangerous driving can have short sentences. I would give her 5 years but think she would get less.

Now i know people will look at it and see that the first case was a child so will be worse. I see it as 2 lives and disregard the ages involved. The topics are very emotive and both are at the desecration of the judge.

Do we know what the real sentences were?

The difference being is that in case 1, the charged showed utter disregard for the most vulnerable of life. So much so, that she left a helpless infant alone while she went out to enjoy herself. In case 2, the charged was involved in an accident. She may be morally and legally culpable, but she didn't set out to put anyone at risk, even if she did by her own foolishness. In case 1, it would have been clear right from the onset, at least to a person with normal reasoning power, that the baby's life was being put at risk for the most trivial of reasons. Additionally, in case 2, the lost life was actually complicit in the crime. This wasn't the situation in case 1.

I think your sentencing is way off key to be honest.

 

[GrandOldTeam]

Lads these are actual cases and I'll reveal the sentences they received tomorrow.

Death, sentences as if you was the judge.

I'm more interested in how you judge the seriousness of the two in comparison.

 

[Nebbiolo]

Lads these are actual cases and I'll reveal the sentences they received tomorrow.

Death, sentences as if you was the judge.

I'm more interested in how you judge the seriousness of the two in comparison.

I've got a feeling that you'll reveal that in case 1, the mother received a less harsh sentence than in the second case.

Both were unfortunate to be honest. But I think in the first, the accused showed what my old professor (legal philosopher) would call a "callous disregard for human life". I'm less sure that was true in the second case.

In saying that, to really make up our minds we would all have to sit through the entire proceedings. So even if we differ from the real verdicts, it doesn't mean we would differ from them given further information.

 

[GrandOldTeam]

I think the important thing to remember with regards to the first is the "She was known to social services"

It wasn't her first offence with regards to neglect. The length of her sentence depends if you think shes guilty of causing or allowing death.

Shes also guilty of perverting the course of justice.

The second case is different. It could well be a case of panic. A young person, full of high-spirits, immune from the dangers of life, goes out and makes a wrong decision. She lies to the police because she's immediately placed in a position that suggests she needs to protect herself. There was not a premeditated attempt at a crime (as with 1), nor was there a reason to assume that her actions were putting life at risk. Again, this is your charge, not mine. But knowing what I know, I would expect a non-custodial sentence. I think she's probably suffered enough.

Thing is though Neb, whatever way you look at it, its got to go down as causing death by dangerous driving.

 

[Nebbiolo]

I think the important thing to remember with regards to the first is the "She was known to social services"

It wasn't her first offence with regards to neglect. The length of her sentence depends if you think shes guilty of causing or allowing death.

Shes also guilty of perverting the course of justice.



Thing is though Neb, whatever way you look at it, its got to go down as causing death by dangerous driving.

Agreed. I cannot, however, imagine a "right-thinking" person getting into situation 1. In contrast, I can get my head around why the second individual acted as she did, including the lies she initially told. It's still wrong, and the act deserves to be punished. But I can see a moral difference between the two cases, given the information I have.

 

[GrandOldTeam]

I'd be looking at a custodial sentence assuming she is fit to stand trial. Would 7 years be lenient or would it be tyrannical?

But knowing what I know, I would expect a non-custodial sentence. I think she's probably suffered enough.

So your saying the first should get seven years and the second a non-custodial sentence?

Important to think what kind of message that would send to society.

"Don't worry kids, you can drive drunk, at twice the speed limit, kill someone, try and blame someone else and you'll be let off"...

I see your point like, and you have recognised the need to punish her, I'm not sure a non-custodial sentence would suffice.