I'm not sure, but it seems so with me too.Paradoxrifts said:Why is everything just slightly more psychotic when it involves messages written in lipstick?
oh yes, hah hah hah! They bundled into his house, made him strip naked, wrote "Gay Boy" on his head in lipstick, covered him in oil and then ignited him, hi-larious. I'm not quite sure which part of that is supposed to be funny or count as a prank. That's being a massive sick **** involving something that was a hate crime assault.krazykidd said:Yeah but , rehabilitation from what? It's a prank gone wrong . An accident if you will . You know teenagers , dumb as bricks . I blame Jackass . Anyways . I think this is fair . It was an accident , but the fact that he fled from the scene , instead of , you know , doing something is punishable by law ( as far as i know ) .SecretNegative said:If he set another guy on fire adn got 3,5 years and the minimum for manslaughter is five years...what?
I really can't tell if 3.5 years is long enough, since I've never been to a prison in my whole life, or even met a criminal (or atleast, someone who said they were a criminal).
Prison is about rehabilitation, and if he can rehabilitate in 3.5 years, then it's long enough.
Also , while iv'e never been to prison , 3 years is a long time . People don't seem to realise that .
It's up on the BBC site now, here's the link just so you can stick it in the OP, otherwise people are just gonna give you flak for using the sun ><Squiddles said:-snip-
I understand where your coming from but as a member of the LGBT community I just felt that this story should be out there and being read by, maybe not like minded people, but possibly a more diverse range of different people to see what they also think since I know what I think about this event.Akratus said:You know, you're not helping anyone by posting shock news from THE SUN on a GAMING FORUM.
One can't help but note that the victim was gay and autistic, and wonder if that had anything to do with it.Easton Dark said:3.5 years for (allegedly) manslaughter and obstruction of justice when he lied about how it happened?
Had to have had some help in court.
What, you mean he got the lenient sentence because people didn't like the life of the victim?thaluikhain said:One can't help but note that the victim was gay and autistic, and wonder if that had anything to do with it.Easton Dark said:3.5 years for (allegedly) manslaughter and obstruction of justice when he lied about how it happened?
Had to have had some help in court.
I'm with you on this one. Unless I was there I can't determine the motives, and that makes all the difference in court. In the US you have to be proven guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt. If he didn't intend to kill the kid then it was manslaughter at most. All things given though I think he probably deserved the full 5 years (of which he would probably serve 2 if he behaved) for the hate speech and running. If there was intent then he deserved a murder charge, but with nobody to prove intent there was no way that would ever have gone the distance in court (provided he had a competent lawyer) and he would have gotten off scott free.Lilani said:I think I'd like to see this from a less sketchy source. While either way this is a terrible thing, it's clear the media is wanting to tell a story and at this point they have no evidence to prove their narrative has any truth to is. I'll admit writing taunts on somebody, covering them in oil, and lighting their crotch on fire seems like a terrible thing to do to someone on their birthday, but stranger things have happened and there's no use ruining two lives because we wanted to be the first ones to vilify this kid.
More or less, though they almost certainly wouldn't have consciously decided that. Noticeably small sentences for stuff like this has a habit of happening. The "gay panic" defense isn't quite the same thing, but there seems to be an overlap.Easton Dark said:What, you mean he got the lenient sentence because people didn't like the life of the victim?
Depends on what your end goal is.Desert Punk said:Nah because a few years in prison is totally cool for a hate crime and killing.
This is one of the reasons hate crimes tend to exist in the first place.Easton Dark said:What, you mean he got the lenient sentence because people didn't like the life of the victim?
Yes I know The Sun more often than not words their news in the most "Grab the readers attention and make them make a split choice in their mind on the matter from the title!", but I also linked The Mirror along side it since I couldn't find that much information on this than those two sites and knew just putting The Sun up wouldn't be the best move. Also now The BBC on the event.Pinkamena said:Wow, I can't get over how biased this article is. Is the Sun always like this? And what the hell is this:
![]()
I put a link to The Mirror and now a link to The BBC on the event, since I do know The Sun is never really viewed well by people, but I wanted to put down more than just a link to The Mirror if people wanted to read more on this event. Hopefully these are better sources for you as well.Lilani said:I think I'd like to see this from a less sketchy source. While either way this is a terrible thing, it's clear the media is wanting to tell a story and at this point they have no evidence to prove their narrative has any truth to is. I'll admit writing taunts on somebody, covering them in oil, and lighting their crotch on fire seems like a terrible thing to do to someone on their birthday, but stranger things have happened and there's no use ruining two lives because we wanted to be the first ones to vilify this kid.
Basically...... no one stole money from rich people or the government, everyone knows money crimes are worse than human suffering......soren7550 said:This piece of shit gets three years for setting a kid on fire, killing him, and those two football shitheads only get a year in juvie after gang raping that girl and bragging about it? What the fuck is up with the criminal justice system?