General Discussion Undecided where to post - do it here. |
Reply to Thread New Thread |
![]() |
#21 |
|
It's actually in the he Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of the Council of Europe.
(art. 6.2): "Everyone charged with a criminal offence shall be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law". This convention has been adopted by treaty and is binding on all Council of Europe members. Currently (and in any foreseeable expansion of the EU) every country member of the European Union is also member to the Council of Europe, so this stands for EU members as a matter of course. |
![]() |
![]() |
#22 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#23 |
|
Originally posted by snoopy369
Voluntary manslaughter (what he'd have been convicted of here unless he planned to kill her ahead of time and this could be proven) would bring around an 8 year sentence typically in the US, or even a bit less often. Voluntary, not voluntary... that is the question. The full story is following: Bertrand Cantat was violent, abusive BF and he already beated Marie Trintignan before, but never to death (of course). Marie nevertheless stayed with him. She was shooting (she was an actress) in Lithuania, under Mom's direction (Mom: Nadine Trintignan, is film director), but probably bored in some foreign country, she called him and asked him to come. Cantat comes to Lithuania, and, probably out of boredom decide to have some drug party. Both take drugs. They have an argument and Cantat, while stone, starts beating her. He is not in his normal state, he does not know when to stop and he beats her to death. So, if you are yourself drunk, you step in the car of a drunken person - you called him: he is your BF, but you also know he is a terrible driver - and you get yourself killed because he crashed the car in a tree. How much should he get for this? Is he a murderer? Is it voluntary manslaughter? |
![]() |
![]() |
#25 |
|
Originally posted by The Mad Viking
The damage is already done. Tougher sentences are all about making the victim(s), family and/or friends FEEL BETTER after the fact. No, tougher sentences is also about keeping the criminal away from doing the same thing again for a longer time. The sooner the criminal gets out, the sooner he can do it again ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#28 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#30 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#31 |
|
Originally posted by Shrapnel12
My common sense tells me there are probably other countries like the US, but I don't know of any. So an honest question: What other countries have judicial systems where you are innocent until proven guilty and the prosecution has to show guilt beyond a reasonable doubt? This has to be the funniest and most ignorant statement on Apolyton since Kuciwalker assumed that every teenage boy has a private en suite bathroom to jack off in. |
![]() |
![]() |
#32 |
|
Originally posted by Agathon
Wrong. Tougher sentences in democracies have more to do with the level to which the authoritarian personality dominates in a particular society. The US is extremely punitive because it is an extremely conservative and authoritarian society, which elects on the whole extremely conservative and authoritarian representatives. This is a scientifically established fact, so don't bother with any mealy mouthed right wing denials. That doesn't make mine wrong, there can be several reasons for tougher sentences you know ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#34 |
|
|
![]() |
Reply to Thread New Thread |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|