Legal proceedings is a game of quoting precedents in order to leverage your clients‘ circumstances in his/her favor. It is the backbone of a legal argument as it is an established standard accepting from the courts and by the courts.
So why in the world, let alone Canada would the courts establish as precedence the sentencing of 4.25 years per case of murder, 17 years in total for 4 lives. Understand, this goes beyond the reality that a murder charge carries less than 5 years as a consequence. It also makes amendments to what sentencing is based on.
Sentencing of all convicted criminals was, up until this point, based on an objective, which a subject slant, evaluation of crime and intent. The subjectivity relating to the evaluation of crime and its sentencing stems from it being framed and coloured by circumstance and the interpretation of circumstances by the judge or jury.
None the less, sentencing was rooted in crime and intent of the actor. With this new precedence, the weapon now, is a variable that lends itself to decisions of sentencing. Making the evaluation more complex by allowing subjective notions adjusting consequential weight. Now into assessment methods will inevitably include predisposed concepts of weapons and there dangers. This distorting the weigh place choice and actions of the perpetrator.
A murder charge brings with it a sentence of 25 year to life. Manslaughter is bound to 15 years. Any variation in these sentences is a result of intent. Now the means by why the death is realized can reduce the consequential weight but up to 5 time its affect and effect, as vehicle homicide is met with less than 5 years. Which leads me to ask what characteristics are now the benchmarks and indicator of such variation within such an assessment of consequential weight.
Lets just take a moment to compare and contracts different form of murder. In this example lets turn to homicide by way of vehicle, gun, and knife. First, what is the likelihood of previous relationship with victim? All forms can be targeted attack, vehicular homicide carry a higher probability civilian casualty (no pre-existing relationship/contract). So variation of intent is possible within vehicular homicide.
Now is the question of prospects of the interaction leading to death. This is the area in which murder becomes manslaughter. The evaluation is rooted in intent but there is utility in circumstantial manipulation. Were the perpetrators able to minimize impact of action and how that reveals intent. All are a means to injure, maim or even kill. That is based on the decisions of the perpetrator.
There is to be consideration of response by the victim and how that also contributed to outcomes but the weight of evaluation is and should be placed on the perpetrator. Regardless of the dynamic of action and response, the probability of severity of incident void of intention is higher by a vehicle versus Knife or gun.
So, vehicular homicide does stand in variation from gun or knife violence when considering intention relating to severity of outcomes but the prospects of it being a target attack is not only possible but these conditions making it manipulation of intension relation to occurrence is also with higher probability.
Given the utility and defence available for the act of vehicular homicide, we all should be asking, why would lawyers and judges be establishing such a precedence of consequential weight making the voice viable to a killer.
This is madness and a complete relinquishing on that which such civil servants exist for and of - the protection not of one but of all. My final question is. Where are the people screaming and crying out for the institutionalization of such legal realities. What is next the sexual perversions go without consequence.
Right now we, through the institution of the courts is defining our values. Is this the value we now put on a human life - 4.25 years. On the bases not of crime or intent but on weapon of choice. I guess using the execution of the unborn has conditioned us and generalized but us to represent life in general.
The piece was inspired by this article Driver who killed woman, 3 daughters sentenced to 17 years in prison (msn.com)