Man jailed for six years after brutal attack on cyclist

Ramuz wrote:

Bring back hanging.

Albert Camus wrote:

“But what then is capital punishment but the most premeditated of murders, to which no criminal's deed, however calculated it may be, can be compared?

For there to be equivalence, the death penalty would have to punish a criminal who had warned his victim of the date at which he would inflict a horrible death on him and who, from that moment onward, had confined him at his mercy for months.

Such a monster is not encountered in private life.”

zanf wrote:

Ramuz wrote:

Bring back hanging.

Albert Camus wrote:

“But what then is capital punishment but the most premeditated of murders, to which no criminal's deed, however calculated it may be, can be compared?

For there to be equivalence, the death penalty would have to punish a criminal who had warned his victim of the date at which he would inflict a horrible death on him and who, from that moment onward, had confined him at his mercy for months.

Such a monster is not encountered in private life.”

An old fallacy of course. The equivalent to torture and death is torture and death. Or varying infinite degrees.

zanf wrote:

Ramuz wrote:

Bring back hanging.

Albert Camus wrote:

“But what then is capital punishment but the most premeditated of murders, to which no criminal's deed, however calculated it may be, can be compared?

For there to be equivalence, the death penalty would have to punish a criminal who had warned his victim of the date at which he would inflict a horrible death on him and who, from that moment onward, had confined him at his mercy for months.

Such a monster is not encountered in private life.”

An old fallacy of course. The equivalent to torture and death is torture and death. Or varying infinite degrees.

zanf wrote:

Ramuz wrote:

Bring back hanging.

Albert Camus wrote:

“But what then is capital punishment but the most premeditated of murders, to which no criminal's deed, however calculated it may be, can be compared?

For there to be equivalence, the death penalty would have to punish a criminal who had warned his victim of the date at which he would inflict a horrible death on him and who, from that moment onward, had confined him at his mercy for months.

Such a monster is not encountered in private life.”

Nice quote but as the first poster is advocating a death sentence for a brutal but not fatal attack, I doubt he'd be swayed by the musings of a French philosopher on the nuances of equivalence in punishment. 

Guy is a thug, and one can only hope he sees the error of his ways during his incarceration, however long it turns out to be.

Dr_Lex wrote:

zanf wrote:

Ramuz wrote:

Bring back hanging.

Albert Camus wrote:

“But what then is capital punishment but the most premeditated of murders, to which no criminal's deed, however calculated it may be, can be compared?

For there to be equivalence, the death penalty would have to punish a criminal who had warned his victim of the date at which he would inflict a horrible death on him and who, from that moment onward, had confined him at his mercy for months.

Such a monster is not encountered in private life.”

Nice quote but as the first poster is advocating a death sentence for a brutal but not fatal attack, I doubt he'd be swayed by the musings of a French philosopher on the nuances of equivalence in punishment. 

Guy is a thug, and one can only hope he sees the error of his ways during his incarceration, however long it turns out to be.

Quite right, I wasn't swayed when studying jurisprudence because it was a fallacy then and still is today.

There are far more convincing reasons to be against the death penalty of course, and I am against it.

Doesn't mean I can't make posts suggesting colourful ways to dispose of people I don't like.

Nuance, and all. You're into that right.

unconstituted wrote:

Waste of money keeping him jailed for 6 years...... 

If only he would serve 6 years.  Normal practice is to release them at the halfway point which, I am told, is largely to free up space in our prisons.

mike the bike wrote:

unconstituted wrote:

Waste of money keeping him jailed for 6 years...... 

 

If only he would serve 6 years.  Normal practice is to release them at the halfway point which, I am told, is largely to free up space in our prisons.

You only serve half the sentence and become eligible for parole if the sentence is between 1 to 4 years. Becoming eligible does not mean automatic release on licence. Lots of things come into play.

He got 6 years. He may well have spent time on remand. This could be deducted from his sentence if the judge agrees. It doesn't always happen.

At some point the scumbag will become eligible for parole and he has to apply for it. He can be knocked back. I'm not sure how the parole eligibility date is worked out, I cba to research it.

I reckon he will do 4 years. Still an appalling sentence though and despite what the detective said to the media I bet she was really disappointed with that sentence.