1
   

Only in backward Britain

 
 
kev
 
Reply Sat 7 Feb, 2004 02:17 pm
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/content_objectid=13921237_method=full_siteid=50143_headline=-FAMILY%2DS%2DFURY%2DAT%2DCAR%2DKILLER%2DS%2DSENTENCE-name_page.html
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 708 • Replies: 8
No top replies

 
roverroad
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Feb, 2004 08:30 pm
That is pretty pathetic. The guy should have gotten life. Especially since he not only drove off but also tried to cover it up... What was the judge thinking?
0 Replies
 
Phoenix32890
 
  1  
Reply Sun 8 Feb, 2004 06:38 am
Quote:
But prosecutors claim there was not enough evidence.


Very, very pathetic. Problem is, the law needs to be able to PROVE that a crime was committed. KNOWING, unfortunately is not enough.

Some years ago, there was a couple who lived on my mother's street. She was a youngish, middle aged woman. He looked like a feeble old man, who was in a wheelchair. The man died.

Subsequently I found out that the police knew that he had been murdered by his wife. The woman had been feeding him tiny bits of arsenic in his food over a long period of time. Arsenic remains in the cells, and the effects build up. That is why, every time I saw the man, he appeared sicker and more frail.

Everyone, including the police, KNEW that the woman had murdered her husband, slowly. Problem was, it could not be proved. So she went merrily along, scot-free!
0 Replies
 
Wilso
 
  1  
Reply Sun 8 Feb, 2004 06:49 am
Not enough evidence? How about trying to convict him anyway, and allowing a jury to decide if there's enough evidence. What a crock!
0 Replies
 
Wilso
 
  1  
Reply Sun 8 Feb, 2004 06:50 am
That sort of backward crap happens here as well.
0 Replies
 
Phoenix32890
 
  1  
Reply Sun 8 Feb, 2004 06:51 am
Wilso- I don't know the exact mechanism, but in the US, I believe that there has to be sufficient evidence before an indictment is handed down. Also, a smart DA will not prosecute a case that he knows that he has no chance of winning.

Any legal experts around to comment on this?
0 Replies
 
Wilso
 
  1  
Reply Sun 8 Feb, 2004 06:53 am
I also don't know the exact mechanism, but I do know there are myriad differences between US and British (on which Oz law is based on) law.
0 Replies
 
kev
 
  1  
Reply Sun 8 Feb, 2004 02:20 pm
I agree completely with Phoenix that if there is not enough evidence it is wrong to suppose someones guilt, but read again what was said:

Kadri admitted speeding when he overtook a car which had slowed as Callum crossed a road with his brother Sam, 12, and a friend on New Year's Day. Leaving the boy for dead, Kadri fled, dumping his Renault 5 and destroying documents linking him to the car.

Callum, known as CJ, died from his injuries.

Kathryn says Kadri should have been charged with causing death by dangerous driving. But prosecutors claim there was not enough evidence.

If this ******* toerag ADMITTED what he did how the **** can there be "NOT ENOUGH EVIDENCE"
0 Replies
 
kev
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Feb, 2004 01:06 am
I've just read on the BBC teletext that the toerag above is to have his sentenced REDUCED.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

T'Pring is Dead - Discussion by Brandon9000
Another Calif. shooting spree: 4 dead - Discussion by Lustig Andrei
Friends don't let friends fat-talk - Discussion by hawkeye10
Before you criticize the media - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Fatal Baloon Accident - Discussion by 33export
The Day Ferguson Cops Were Caught in a Bloody Lie - Discussion by bobsal u1553115
Robin Williams is dead - Discussion by Butrflynet
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Only in backward Britain
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 12/01/2021 at 01:24:11