|
|
Post by woodstein on Nov 1, 2017 10:00:46 GMT
Woman in Manchester gets 5 years for pushing a bloke to his death in front of a tram at Victoria station, plenty of previous offences too. Disgraceful leniency from courts. No way a bloke would only get that. Sexism the other way round there I'd say.
|
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Nov 1, 2017 10:11:25 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Nov 1, 2017 10:43:06 GMT
Woman in Manchester gets 5 years for pushing a bloke to his death in front of a tram at Victoria station, plenty of previous offences too. Disgraceful leniency from courts. No way a bloke would only get that. Sexism the other way round there I'd say. I would imagine there will be a appeal of sentence On another point I do hope her children are nice and safe in care |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 1, 2017 11:19:23 GMT
When you are responsible for murdering someone, you should stay in prison for life, or even better get put down!
|
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Nov 1, 2017 15:14:55 GMT
The reason she got 5 years was because it was manslaughter, not murder. How it was manslaughter I'll never know, but I don't know why anyone is surprised by this.
|
|
|
|
Post by LL Cool Dave on Nov 1, 2017 16:56:44 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by lawrieleslie on Nov 2, 2017 7:40:27 GMT
IMO there is a big difference in the actions that killed both these men. The woman acted impulsively and clearly didn’t intend to kill the man under the tram but it was the result of her actions so manslaughter verdict was appropriate. The other case was a result of a premeditated crime and the bloke ran over his victim then reversed to run over him a second time which is why it was murder not manslaughter. I agree, in the first case the woman with so many crimes under her belt and a danger to society, should be banged up for much longer though.
|
|
|
|
Post by bathstoke on Nov 2, 2017 8:07:16 GMT
IMO there is a big difference in the actions that killed both these men. The woman acted impulsively and clearly didn’t intend to kill the man under the tram but it was the result of her actions so manslaughter verdict was appropriate. The other case was a result of a premeditated crime and the bloke ran over his victim then reversed to run over him a second time which is why it was murder not manslaughter. I agree, in the first case the woman with so many crimes under her belt and a danger to society, should be banged up for much longer though. 'Ark at Lawie flying the flag of the SS voice of reasonXx |
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Nov 2, 2017 11:24:25 GMT
IMO there is a big difference in the actions that killed both these men. The woman acted impulsively and clearly didn’t intend to kill the man under the tram but it was the result of her actions so manslaughter verdict was appropriate. The other case was a result of a premeditated crime and the bloke ran over his victim then reversed to run over him a second time which is why it was murder not manslaughter. I agree, in the first case the woman with so many crimes under her belt and a danger to society, should be banged up for much longer though. Spot on. |
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Nov 2, 2017 11:50:43 GMT
IMO there is a big difference in the actions that killed both these men. The woman acted impulsively and clearly didn’t intend to kill the man under the tram but it was the result of her actions so manslaughter verdict was appropriate. The other case was a result of a premeditated crime and the bloke ran over his victim then reversed to run over him a second time which is why it was murder not manslaughter. I agree, in the first case the woman with so many crimes under her belt and a danger to society, should be banged up for much longer though. Agreed. The real scandal here is that we seem to be unable to get to grips with how to deal (long term) with a woman who obviously has serious mental/personality issues which make her a permanent danger to others. In this case though, she was clearly guilty of manslaughter rather than murder. Hopefully, if/when she reaches a release date from this sentence they may have worked out a long term plan to deal with her - is sectioning her under the Mental Health Act a realistic option? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 2, 2017 12:00:28 GMT
IMO there is a big difference in the actions that killed both these men. The woman acted impulsively and clearly didn’t intend to kill the man under the tram but it was the result of her actions so manslaughter verdict was appropriate. The other case was a result of a premeditated crime and the bloke ran over his victim then reversed to run over him a second time which is why it was murder not manslaughter. I agree, in the first case the woman with so many crimes under her belt and a danger to society, should be banged up for much longer though. Agreed. The real scandal here is that we seem to be unable to get to grips with how to deal (long term) with a woman who obviously has serious mental/personality issues which make her a permanent danger to others. In this case though, she was clearly guilty of manslaughter rather than murder. Hopefully, if/when she reaches a release date from this sentence they may have worked out a long term plan to deal with her - is sectioning her under the Mental Health Act a realistic option? No just make her PM with the other nutter |
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Nov 2, 2017 12:34:59 GMT
IMO there is a big difference in the actions that killed both these men. The woman acted impulsively and clearly didn’t intend to kill the man under the tram but it was the result of her actions so manslaughter verdict was appropriate. The other case was a result of a premeditated crime and the bloke ran over his victim then reversed to run over him a second time which is why it was murder not manslaughter. I agree, in the first case the woman with so many crimes under her belt and a danger to society, should be banged up for much longer though. Agreed. The real scandal here is that we seem to be unable to get to grips with how to deal (long term) with a woman who obviously has serious mental/personality issues which make her a permanent danger to others. In this case though, she was clearly guilty of manslaughter rather than murder. Hopefully, if/when she reaches a release date from this sentence they may have worked out a long term plan to deal with her - is sectioning her under the Mental Health Act a realistic option? What I will say is, correct, guilty of manslaughter, but 5 years feels like a very short sentence. I'm sure I've seen others get 10 for manslaughter, with cases that feel less.... questionable than this. I suppose we were not privy to the CCTV, which I would expect was shown in court. The real question is, did she know when she pushed him that he would fall into a tram? Neither me, you, nor anyone else knows. |
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Nov 2, 2017 12:55:27 GMT
Agreed. The real scandal here is that we seem to be unable to get to grips with how to deal (long term) with a woman who obviously has serious mental/personality issues which make her a permanent danger to others. In this case though, she was clearly guilty of manslaughter rather than murder. Hopefully, if/when she reaches a release date from this sentence they may have worked out a long term plan to deal with her - is sectioning her under the Mental Health Act a realistic option? What I will say is, correct, guilty of manslaughter, but 5 years feels like a very short sentence. I'm sure I've seen others get 10 for manslaughter, with cases that feel less.... questionable than this. I suppose we were not privy to the CCTV, which I would expect was shown in court. The real question is, did she know when she pushed him that he would fall into a tram? Neither me, you, nor anyone else knows. In the report I read it seemed to be accepted that she hadn't known he was likely to fall under the tram. This may, of course, be because of her mental state and may not be what a "normal" person might have anticipated. I agree that 5 years is short for manslaughter and I live in hope that the system will find a way to deal with her long term mental problems which will clearly make her a danger to others if she is simply released when she has reached that point. Personally I can't see a reason why she should not be sectioned - but I am in no way an expert on either mental health or the law relating to it. I'm sure this country would be a safer and better place if we spent the money and effort on mental health which we should be doing.  |
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Nov 2, 2017 13:04:24 GMT
What I will say is, correct, guilty of manslaughter, but 5 years feels like a very short sentence. I'm sure I've seen others get 10 for manslaughter, with cases that feel less.... questionable than this. I suppose we were not privy to the CCTV, which I would expect was shown in court. The real question is, did she know when she pushed him that he would fall into a tram? Neither me, you, nor anyone else knows. In the report I read it seemed to be accepted that she hadn't known he was likely to fall under the tram. This may, of course, be because of her mental state and may not be what a "normal" person might have anticipated. I agree that 5 years is short for manslaughter and I live in hope that the system will find a way to deal with her long term mental problems which will clearly make her a danger to others if she is simply released when she has reached that point. Personally I can't see a reason why she should not be sectioned - but I am in no way an expert on either mental health or the law relating to it. I'm sure this country would be a safer and better place if we spent the money and effort on mental health which we should be doing. Why spend money on mental health when we could pay for Nicholas Winterton's second home? |
|
|
|
Post by lowlands on Nov 2, 2017 16:15:04 GMT
Nut jobs were kept safely in homes my granddad went in one in the 1970s when he kept seeing little green men apparently eating his dinner and polishing his shoes, anyway the place he was in was clean tidy and they were treated well. Some were raging nut jobs others had issues. Then along came care in the community and we let them all out and then they kill someone and we then send them to jail.
So all is good because everyone says mental hospitals is no place for them, so where do we put them, oh I know let them wander around stare you out and then kill you awww brilliant idea saves on hospitals being full of people from Shelton
|
|
|
|
Post by duckling on Nov 3, 2017 12:31:47 GMT
I don't know about this particular case, but there is no question that being female, as I am, helps with police and the criminal justice system.
Even with simple things like driving, police treat women much more leniently. I've been pulled over and gotten away with it when I'm sure a man would have been ticketed.
In the United States where some states have the death penalty, you almost never see women sentenced to death even if their crimes are every bit as evil as those committed by men sentenced to death.
It's not uncommon, when a man and woman commit a crime together, for the man to receive a harsher sentence.
|
|
