South Australia's Attorney-General says he will consider pushing for an appeal against the sentence of a 24-year-old man who killed another motorist during a high speed chase. Michael Atkinson says he will make the bid if Department of Public Prosecutions (DPP) does not object to a five-year sentence which was handed down today. Denis Vlado Dundovic was driving a stolen car at more than 160 kilometres an hour at Wingfield, trying to evade police. He had two young female passengers, when, with no headlights on, he ploughed into the car of Peter Godfrey, killing him. Dundovic was under the influence of methylamphetamines, was on parole and unlicensed. The victim's family were today outraged at what they say is a soft sentence. The Attorney-General Michael Atkinson echoed that. "It is hard to imagine a worse case of death by dangerous driving," he said. He said Parliament increased the maximum sentence for such offences to life in prison, trying to send a message to judges about what is appropriate in aggravated road crashes.
There was an interesting experiment done, where a cross section of people were asked to (pretend) sentence real cases. Given basic info, like what we get from the media, they all universally handed down much tougher sentences than were actually given IRL. Once furnished with the mitigating circumstances (abused child, foster homes etc). They all without exception gave sentences that were in most cases significantly less than the actual ones.
This guy 'sounds' like he should have had the book thrown at him. However only 4 people know the complete circumstances surrounding this sentence, and none of them visit GU.
stuff the circumstances about being abused as a child. There are heaps of people who have been abused as children who go on to do great things and not stealing cars and raping little girls.
The justice system is obviously flawed. I was a little surprised when Peter Adamson was sentenced to jail, having seen another politician steal a government owned Microwave, Fridge and television only to pawn them to fund a gambling habit. Maybe Peter should have cried gambling habit and he could have also gone free?
Quote from SperO;340001: stuff the circumstances about being abused as a child. There are heaps of people who have been abused as children who go on to do great things and not stealing cars and raping little girls.
dead on.
i believe in the law there should be a age limit or year limit on which you just blame your upbringings for certain activity's unless its a medical condition.
and driving under the influence of methylamphetamines is just plain stupid.. perhaps its time for a new law system ??
Quote from SperO;340001: stuff the circumstances about being abused as a child. There are heaps of people who have been abused as children who go on to do great things and not stealing cars and raping little girls.
Totally agree with you on that, tho there are other possible circumstances that should be considered.
Quote from lrinaldi;340003: The justice system is obviously flawed. I was a little surprised when Peter Adamson was sentenced to jail, having seen another politician steal a government owned Microwave, Fridge and television only to pawn them to fund a gambling habit. Maybe Peter should have cried gambling habit and he could have also gone free?
Sadly that is probably true. Adamson should definitely serve time tho not so much for the thefts as a punishment for the abuse of trust and power, and surely fraudulent accounting or similar was involved somehow. Was he hit with a fraud charge?
Quote from dragon xr;340005: dead on.
i believe in the law there should be a age limit or year limit on which you just blame your upbringings for certain activity's unless its a medical condition. ...
There is its meant to be 18 when 'real' time happens. Theres other things than upbringing tho, traumatic incident, spiral into depression/drugs/alcohol, steal cars to fund habit or feel alive/anything again or drink driving accident, busted. Deserve time or help?
Quote from dragon xr;340005: and driving under the influence of methylamphetamines is just plain stupid...
Too right... defending yourself by way of being 'under the influence' is absolute junk, and if anything shouldn't be used as a point of consideration.
It makes no difference what you're on, or shouldn't in the eyes of the law (only difference being medicated pharmaceuticles that have unwritten side effects, and under correct use).
Not responsible as they were under the influence... Responsible for being under the influence.
If you can't control yourself when your drunk or high (which is crap, everybody maintains at least a shred of control) then you need to take care to ensure that you won't be in a possition to hurt anybody else. By all means kill yourself, but don't **** it up for others.
YouTube - Man Takes Street Valium and is All Smiles
Quote from Evil @ngel;340075: There is its meant to be 18 when 'real' time happens. Theres other things than upbringing tho, traumatic incident, spiral into depression/drugs/alcohol, steal cars to fund habit or feel alive/anything again or drink driving accident, busted. Deserve time or help?
they possibly need help if they did have those symptoms.. but putting yourself under in influence to escape the pain or suffering without going to see help is just as dumb. but regardless of the circumstances he was taking a persons life and should been sentenced a minimum of 10 years, on top of the non medicated drugs and having 2 other people involved in such an incident that could traumatize the passengers for the next 5-10 years should incline another 15 year sentence without a second thought..
and giving people the chance for medical help.. ffs helping criminals to get back into society under medical disorder or treatment without a history of some sort of a medical condition is just absurd.... pity the DEAD don't have that option..
the system is obviously corrupt... time for a revolution :D
EDIT: not aiming it directly at you evil.. you just lit the spark :P