Justice

[Fixey]

17 year old Samoan school boy walking home at 1am gets called a ****er by a 30 year old, the boy punches him once. 30 year old falls and hits head on pavement and dies......What should happen to the boy?

 

[steve]

17 year old Samoan school boy walking home at 1am gets called a ****er by a 30 year old, the boy punches him once. 30 year old falls and hits head on pavement and dies......What should happen to the boy?

Interesting, did this actually happen?

 

[MountainPro]

17 year old Samoan school boy walking home at 1am gets called a ****er by a 30 year old, the boy punches him once. 30 year old falls and hits head on pavement and dies......What should happen to the boy?

tough one,

if there were no witnesses then he may be up for a murder or manslaughter charge.

 

[Hypnospin]

now, what if a law enforcement (in the us) officer was harrangued offensively and a death resulted? an aquittal more than likely, after a thorough departmental investigation, of course.

tough one,

if there were no witnesses then he may be up for a murder or manslaughter charge.

 

[Fixey]

Interesting, did this actually happen?

Yeah, Good Kid. School prefect ect.

 

[Fixey]

tough one,

if there were no witnesses then he may be up for a murder or manslaughter charge.

There where witnesses.....He has been charged with murder, will probably get life which over here means out in 10 years. But for the grace of god goes I......

 

[wolfix]

There where witnesses.....He has been charged with murder, will probably get life which over here means out in 10 years. But for the grace of god goes I......

Sad story.... The Samoan boy is the aggressor in this case. Name calling is not a reason to attack anyone. A murder charge might be a little strong , but manslaughter is maybe in the right direction. I am assuming here that the Samoan boy was just called the name and was not threatened with harm.
Everyone gets called names. Racial names are no more damaging then other names. I was a Catholic raised in a non-Catholic neighborhood. I know it is tough not to hit back.
The result of the actions of the Samoan is that a life was taken. Someone is going to be without a son/father/ or wage earner. But to incarcerate the Samoan for a real long time serves no purpose as long he does not have a history of violence.

 

[Carrera]

I suppose it depends how hard the blow was. If it was just a basic lashing out in anger, it sounds to me like there are many mitigating circumstances. Maybe there's a lesson here for cyclists not to lash out at car-drivers when you confront someone who nearly killed you by knocking you off.
All in all, it sounds to me like a very bad accident and the charge should be one of plain assault that was provoked by name-calling and abuse.

17 year old Samoan school boy walking home at 1am gets called a ****er by a 30 year old, the boy punches him once. 30 year old falls and hits head on pavement and dies......What should happen to the boy?

 

[Carrera]

The question is, would you have punched a car-driver who nearly knocked you off and then insulted you?
That has happened to me before and, I confess, there is temptation to throw one or two "left hooks". Your adrenalin gets going, testosterone is high and you go into fight or flight mode - a biological condition. Especially if the car-driver laughs in your face and expresses sorrow he didn't actually knock you off but will do so next time.
The boy, in this case, was insulted in an offensive manner and would have been angry and frustrated. There would clearly have been no intention for the man to fall and suffer death.
The lesson is simply not to be provoked if you can help it as you never know what can result. But provocation happens to all of us.

Sad story.... The Samoan boy is the aggressor in this case. Name calling is not a reason to attack anyone. A murder charge might be a little strong , but manslaughter is maybe in the right direction. I am assuming here that the Samoan boy was just called the name and was not threatened with harm.
Everyone gets called names. Racial names are no more damaging then other names. I was a Catholic raised in a non-Catholic neighborhood. I know it is tough not to hit back.
The result of the actions of the Samoan is that a life was taken. Someone is going to be without a son/father/ or wage earner. But to incarcerate the Samoan for a real long time serves no purpose as long he does not have a history of violence.

 

[jhuskey]

He should be charged as any other that attacked someone in anger. No excuses as valid in my opinion.

 

[Carrera]

Hold on, though. I was listening to a catholic nun on Hard Talk who opposed the death penalty (as I do) in the U.S.A. and she was pointing out that when black people kill white people in the U.S. there is far more frequent recourse to the death penalty.
But when a white man kills a black man, he apparently doesn't suffer the death penalty. Or rarely.
What I'm saying is most people on this forum may also lash out as this teenager did under provocation. Even the police lash out when they make arrests so how come they get off free?
We're talking here about a teen who couldn't have had much of punch so I figure the man slipped, fell and hit his head. It was tragic but it wasn't murder. The crime was assault I think but I wouldn't like to be on that particular jury as the case is difficult.
Maybe what would swing me one way or the other would be the attitude of the individual being charged. Is he struck by remorse or laughing at the law? There's a difference, of course.
P.S. my girlfriend was from the States and I've seen her lash out under provocation when she punched another girl over a row about a Madonna tape It does happen at times but I agree it's not justified to come out swinging rights, lefts, upper-cuts, jabs and hooks.

He should be charged as any other that attacked someone in anger. No excuses as valid in my opinion.

 

[jhuskey]

Hold on, though. I was listening to a catholic nun on Hard Talk who opposed the death penalty (as I do) in the U.S.A. and she was pointing out that when black people kill white people in the U.S. there is far more frequent recourse to the death penalty.
But when a white man kills a black man, he apparently doesn't suffer the death penalty. Or rarely.
What I'm saying is most people on this forum may also lash out as this teenager did under provocation. Even the police lash out when they make arrests so how come they get off free?
We're talking here about a teen who couldn't have had much of punch so I figure the man slipped, fell and hit his head. It was tragic but it wasn't murder. The crime was assault I think but I wouldn't like to be on that particular jury as the case is difficult.
Maybe what would swing me one way or the other would be the attitude of the individual being charged. Is he struck by remorse or laughing at the law? There's a difference, of course.
P.S. my girlfriend was from the States and I've seen her lash out under provocation when she punched another girl over a row about a Madonna tape It does happen at times but I agree it's not justified to come out swinging rights, lefts, upper-cuts, jabs and hooks.

I didn't mention the death penalty and a teenager can certainly hit hard enough to kill as can a female.
They should draw no special immunity and face the same justice,whatever might apply.
I could not even make a fair judgement in this case unless I had all the evidence in front of me and had time to consider it. The media, as I have stated, leaves out a lot and exagerates more.
If being insulted was an excuse to kill I could have killed about half of the posters here with justification.

 

[Carrera]

My question is, I suppose, would you hit out in anger when provoked, say, by a car-driver who had nearly knocked you off?
I remember we had this teacher from Scotland when I was a wee laddy (as they say) and, you know, when I think of it I can recall so many scenes of violence. I can personally recall this teacher from Scotland bawling at kids to the point you thought he was about to flip. I saw another teacher punch a black boy in the chest so hard he was left coughing and this kid later went on to become a pretty good track-runner.
Even worse, when a school prank went wrong and one boy slammed a door in a teacher's face as he was entering the class (the guilty party had believed it was some classmate entering), I saw the teacher hurl the kid across some desks and then kick him repeatedly when he was on the floor.
They got away with it too. In those days kids had no rights at all. Maybe the fact the teachers wore a suit and tie helped them get away with it.

I didn't mention the death penalty and a teenager can certainly hit hard enough to kill as can a female.
They should draw no special immunity and face the same justice,whatever might apply.
I could not even make a fair judgement in this case unless I had all the evidence in front of me and had time to consider it. The media, as I have stated, leaves out a lot and exagerates more.
If being insulted was an excuse to kill I could have killed about half of the posters here with justification.

 

[jhuskey]

My question is, I suppose, would you hit out in anger when provoked, say, by a car-driver who had nearly knocked you off?
I remember we had this teacher from Scotland when I was a wee laddy (as they say) and, you know, when I think of it I can recall so many scenes of violence. I can personally recall this teacher from Scotland bawling at kids to the point you thought he was about to flip. I saw another teacher punch a black boy in the chest so hard he was left coughing and this kid later went on to become a pretty good track-runner.
Even worse, when a school prank went wrong and one boy slammed a door in a teacher's face as he was entering the class (the guilty party had believed it was some classmate entering), I saw the teacher hurl the kid across some desks and then kick him repeatedly when he was on the floor.
They got away with it too. In those days kids had no rights at all. Maybe the fact the teachers wore a suit and tie helped them get away with it.

Not so far,however I have wanted to. Maybe that is the difference that thinking it and doing it are two very separate issues.
Most of us go through life and have cause to be angry and do not act in a malicious of violent way.
Where is the line crossed? I am not schooled enough to make a judgement.

I do have a question for you. You reference that a black child was struck. Does that fact that he was black make a difference?

 

[Fixey]

If being insulted was an excuse to kill I could have killed about half of the posters here with justification.

Being insulted is in no way a justification to kill anybody, nobody is saying it is. I do not believe that it is a reasonble conclusion to say that if I punch someone he WILL die! It is a streatch to say if I punch someone he MIGHT die. If it where a reasonable conclusion then every person who ever punched anyone should be charged with attemted murder!

I know this kid so I am not sure how biased I am but I cant see how sending him to jail helps anyone. This guy intended to go onto tertiery education (Already has enough credits to do so) and by all accounts would go on to be a valuable contributing member of the comunity. If he goes to jail he is a burden to society.

He must be held responsible for his actions of course but as far as punitive recourse goes he will see this guys face every time he closes his eyes for the rest of his life and will have to live with that, to me that would be harder than anything a judge could hand out. I personaly would like to see him go on to work and pay maintanance to the guys kids.

 

[jhuskey]

Being insulted is in no way a justification to kill anybody, nobody is saying it is. I do not believe that it is a reasonble conclusion to say that if I punch someone he WILL die! It is a streatch to say if I punch someone he MIGHT die. If it where a reasonable conclusion then every person who ever punched anyone should be charged with attemted murder!

I know this kid so I am not sure how biased I am but I cant see how sending him to jail helps anyone. This guy intended to go onto tertiery education (Already has enough credits to do so) and by all accounts would go on to be a valuable contributing member of the comunity. If he goes to jail he is a burden to society.

He must be held responsible for his actions of course but as far as punitive recourse goes he will see this guys face every time he closes his eyes for the rest of his life and will have to live with that, to me that would be harder than anything a judge could hand out. I personaly would like to see him go on to work and pay maintanance to the guys kids.

Pretty much what I was concluding and of course without knowing the facts I am in the dark about the childs state of mind at the time of the exchange.
The worst, I might assume, would be a wrongful death ruling which could result in no more than probation.He of course could be charged with a higher crime without being convicted of it.
This is of course based on US law.

 

[Carrera]

Sure it makes a difference if he was singled out due to the colour of his skin. My view is people should be treated the same and nobody is better than anyone else. So it doesn't matter if a black man or a white man commits a crime where justice is concerned as either individual should be subject to the same laws and the same right to a fair trial. Don't you agree?
Of course, the same applies to gender and I think women should be paid the same as men if they do the same work and put in the same hours. I don't think people should be classed as better or worse due to gender or racial differences.

Not so far,however I have wanted to. Maybe that is the difference that thinking it and doing it are two very separate issues.
Most of us go through life and have cause to be angry and do not act in a malicious of violent way.
Where is the line crossed? I am not schooled enough to make a judgement.

I do have a question for you. You reference that a black child was struck. Does that fact that he was black make a difference?

 

[ptlwp]

Here in the the USA I believe, the hitting the guy is an assault and battery, the falling and hitting his head was a accident.

He'd get manslaughter and the judge could be as hard or lenient as he wanted to be.

But, calling someone a racial epithet is a felony, so it would be complicated, to say the least.

 

[jhuskey]

Sure it makes a difference if he was singled out due to the colour of his skin. My view is people should be treated the same and nobody is better than anyone else. So it doesn't matter if a black man or a white man commits a crime where justice is concerned as either individual should be subject to the same laws and the same right to a fair trial. Don't you agree?
Of course, the same applies to gender and I think women should be paid the same as men if they do the same work and put in the same hours. I don't think people should be classed as better or worse due to gender or racial differences.

Certainly I agree and that's why I would not differentiate even when telling the story,as in "a child was hit". Color matters not.
The more we point out the differences ,the more they are noted.

 

[Carrera]

Muhammad Ali back in the sixties believed black people should have had their own state but there were reasons behind that view. First of all, black people came to the U.S. as slaves and sweated blood to build the economy which would indicate that black people are owed a decent future within the U.S. and have the same rights as white people.
Back then, black people were often refused service in coffee bars or had to take a back seat in the bus. So, while King favoured integration, Ali supported this idea of state where black folks could run their own show, so to speak. So, he wasn't for integration at that time.
Seeing as even Bush has been forced to admit black Americans are lagging behind whites in terms of prosperity, I wonder whether Ali was right? Or maybe he was just half-right.

Certainly I agree and that's why I would not differentiate even when telling the story,as in "a child was hit". Color matters not.
The more we point out the differences ,the more they are noted.