Sickening

shakermaker · 06-10-2008, 13:59

Footballer Luke McCormick jailed for seven years for killing young brothers - Times Online

This being's actions caused the deaths of two young boys (10 and 8 years of age) who had their whole lives ahead of them, and he gets seven years *maximum* in prison?! This is just sick. He took away two lives. The state should take away his by locking him up for life. This is absolutely terrible news, I can't even articulate it properly how absolutely wrong this is.

mothernature · 06-10-2008, 14:07

Yet another example of one rule for the rich & famous. Bet if it had been Joe public in the dock the sappy judge would have ordered the maximum penalty available.

SPUGGIE J · 06-10-2008, 14:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by mothernature

Yet another example of one rule for the rich & famous. Bet if it had been Joe public in the dock the sappy judge would have ordered the maximum penalty available.

Does that mean the wigged wonder of law was bribed or offered a service he could not refuse? Ok equaility in law is like alledgedly for all but some are more equal than others.

cashman · 06-10-2008, 14:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by mothernature

Yet another example of one rule for the rich & famous. Bet if it had been Joe public in the dock the sappy judge would have ordered the maximum penalty available.

yer quite correct one rule fer rich n famous, but fail to see how he falls into that category

only plays fer plymouth argyle. agree totally with shaker, words fail me as to how he got so light a sentence.

shakermaker · 06-10-2008, 14:34

The maximum sentence he could've received was 14 years. This to me poses two questions:

1) How does killing two boys because of reckless actions equate to being deserving of a halved sentence? Pleading guilty should mean nothing.
2) Why is the maximum only 14 years?!!

cashman · 06-10-2008, 14:37

drunk driving alone should be heavier sentence if ya injure someone never mind kill 2.

Lilly · 06-10-2008, 15:20

It's not very long at all, is it?

He may not have made the decision to kill two children and paralyse their father that day but he made the decision to go to a friend's wedding when he had a match the next day which resulted in him bombing down the motorway still drunk in order to get back in time.

To listen to his barrister to say in court how hard this has been for Luke McCormick must have been hard for the family to bear.

This tragedy was a result of a decision made by Luke McCormick.....if he's any sort of person he will feel awful about it now but there you go.....the sad truth is that he could have prevented it and that family would still be alive and well.

I don't know why he didn't get the maximum 14 yr sentence.....I wonder what you have to do to get that!

derekgas · 06-10-2008, 15:24

Is worse than that, apparently he becomes eligible for parole in 3 and a half years, at which time I could not blame anybody who were to 'slip' and run him over with a range rover!

Neil · 06-10-2008, 15:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lilly

barrister ....... I don't know why he didn't get the maximum 14 yr sentence.....I wonder what you have to do to get that!

You answered your own question before you asked it. Its all down to how good your barrister is.

shakermaker · 06-10-2008, 15:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lilly

I wonder what you have to do to get that!

My thoughts too. How can the judge and defence team sleep at night? An eight year old and a ten year old died because of McCormick's actions. What is wrong with these people?!!

jaysay · 06-10-2008, 16:07

The sentencing in this country is a joke, available for parol in three and a half years, words fail me