Hockey Dad

[LonestarROB]

I haven't been following the whole "hockey dad" trial and all, but he's been sentenced to 6-10 years in prison.

Thoughts??? Was that a long enough sentence? Or did he deserve more?

[LonestarROB]

Here's the article. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img]

Link

[Murphy3]

longer

[turbo.mav]

he deserved 30-40 years

[Rhylan]

Agreed. Drug dealers regularly get more time than 6-10.

Kornheiser on PTI really pissed me off on this. He was all "how is sending this guy to jail justice? One set of kids already lost their dad, now another set of kids has to watch theirs go to jail for the next ten years." So he and Mike Wilbon went back and forth and finally he said "what do you tell his kids?"

To which I said, "Your dad killed somebody, so he's going to jail."

I talk to the TV a lot. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img]

[djb]

Amazing how a murderer only gets 6-10 years.

[Dooby]

As the resident lawyer here, I will chime in.

I thought he should get a tougher sentence, but I expected he'd get a lighter one. make sense?

Technically guys, he is not a murderer. The defense strategy was this: go for self defense; if it fails, you are almost guaranteed to get manslaughter. One definition of manslaugher is "failed self defense". That is when a person mistakenly believes they have a right to use self-defense and kill a person. Hell of a mistake, right? When you are attacked, which the jury apparently believed, you have a right to fight back. However, when you have a clear opportunity to "retreat" or get away from danger, you have an obligation to do so. If you persist and kill the person, you have committed a crime. That crime is manslaughter.

So when hockey dad threw the guy off his back and had him on the concrete, and it was clear he wasn't going to get up, he should have walked away. He should not have continually slammed his head into the concrete.

If you listened to Dunham and Miller this morning, they totally blew this concept.