How Would You Handle These Two Cases: Lewis Gill Vs Matthew Probert

[sp1814]

In the first one, which we discussed here last week, Lewis Gill was sentenced to four years for manslaughter.

I think we can all agree - a very dangerous man who should go away for a long time:

http://news.sky.com/story/1217207/man-jailed-after-one-punch-killed-stranger

But then there's this story from this week. Two men get into a row in a bar, and one man goes off, obtains a claw hammer, waits for the other chap to exit the bar and smashes him so hard in the head that the claw hammer is left sticking out on it's own. I was actually embedded in his brain (think about that for a moment)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lincolnshire-26439104

Now, here's the thing, what sentence would be appropriate for this second case?

In the first, it was a single thump, which resulted in the man losing consciousness and hitting his head on the road and dying.

But isn't the second case even worse? Whilst the fortunate young man didn't die, Matthew Probert, got his mate to go home then drive into town with a hammer, and then smashed him in the skull...

...but as the victim didn't die...should the sentence be less severe?

[sp1814]

By the way, I know there are 'certain persons' who may be gagging to put a racial slant on this with their talk of savages and whatnot.

I'm not interested in that - I'm much more interested in what sentences you would find appropriate.

[rockyracoon]

Second offence is worse IMO and should carry a heavier sentence. To go away after a row and come back with a weapon means he meant to do some serious damage.

[jackthehat]

I think the malevolent intent of Probert ought to see him put away for some considerable while.

Probert was lucky that his victim didn't die in the same way that Gill was unlucky that he did.

[rockyracoon]

As to sentences, not sure about the first offence as I don't think the chap could have foreseen the victim dying, still a nasty piece of work though, but the second one should be at least 15 years.

[WELSHYORKIE]

In a case like this I would hope he would get a substantial prison term of no less than 10 years to serve - preferably more. Did he plead guilty at the trial, do we know?

[Gromit]

Welshyorkie,

From another link.

// Mr Bradley, 22, of Kent Street, Lincoln, has denied a charge of attempting to murder Mr Probert and is due to stand trial at Lincoln Crown Court next month. //

[Gromit]

Sp

I fear you have got a bit confused with the story.

// Matthew Probert, got his mate to go home then drive into town with a hammer //

Probert was the victim not the attacker.

[anotheoldgit]

/// But isn't the second case even worse? Whilst the fortunate young man didn't die, Matthew Probert, got his mate to go home then drive into town with a hammer, and then smashed him in the skull...///

Yes but that is the whole point Matthew Probert, didn't die.

/// ...but as the victim didn't die...should the sentence be less severe? ///

I would say that this thug should be put away for at least five years, but since In the first case the sentence was far too lenient (less than four years) it would be wrong to impose a sentence of more than two years, in the latter case.

[Gromit]

AOG / Sp

You are not comparing like withe like.

Case 1: Charged with manslaughter, he admitted the charge.
Case 2: charged with attempted murder, he denied the charge.

Different circumstances and different sentencing criteria apply.

[mikey4444]

Gromit has hit the nail on the head here ( Oh...sorry ! )

Different cases and therefore different sentences. Both were charged with very different crimes. Anyway, every case is tried on its own merits and I'm not sure we expect the Judges to ring each other up and discuss matters before issuing a sentence.

[emmie]

Mr Bradley should go to prison for a long time, i would say as WY a minimum of 10 years. They are somewhat different, however both are violent individuals, one punched a man so hard he fell and struck his head, that punch could have caused some brain damage, whilst this man left a claw hammer in the mans head.

[sp1814]

Cheers Gromit...yes, got muddled!

The point I was scrabbling to make is this:

Is premeditated attack where the victim doesn't die worse than an unpremeditated attack where the victim DOES die?

Sorry about the capitals - that italics thing isn't working on my stupid iPhone.

[ummmm]

Emmie...you don't have to pinch someone hard for them to fall over and hit their heads.

I think a premeditated attack is far worse.

[ummmm]

*punch

[pixie373]

I agree, sp. In fact i posted a thread myself, a while ago asking if it's right that the punishment depends on the outcome rather than the intention.
Is a person who is accused of "attempted" murder, better than a person who succeeded?

[emmie]

going on the footage of the man who punched that chap, it was full on, not a tap, and he wasn't as i said before the one who had been the subject of the dispute, that was the cyclist, so he lamped the man, for no good reason.

[Gromit]

Pixie

The first man wasn't charged with attempted murder.

[emmie]

Gill, from Sutton, Surrey, pleaded guilty to manslaughter.

He was given a further six months' imprisonment for other offences committed elsewhere, bringing his sentence to a total of four-and-a-half years in jail.

[jomifl]

I tthink apples are worse than pears. Comparing 2 different crimes with different outcomes is a pointles excercise.