Preview Mode Links will not work in preview mode

Judge Joe Says

Aug 4, 2009



Got this question from David, one of our listeners:

Hey Joe, I was just wondering what kind of sentence you'd give this kid. Harsher or more lenient?

Well, seeing as how the maximum term for manslaughter in Australia is 20 years, that's what I'd hit him with. I understand that this was not an intended death, but the fact remains that a death resulted. If we are to be an accountable people, then the penalty must match the crime. People will say that's harsh and it was only an accident, but that's not the issue. A human being is dead due to the actions of another, and that must be addressed. Good question David, feel free to fire more along. Maybe I'll make this a recurring segment if I get enough questions.


Fieldy
over nine years ago

Bang! Down comes the Gavel from Judge Joe.

It\'s such a complex one for me as something like this could happen so easily to a large porcentage of youths.

I dont know if I agree with Judge Joe about 20 years, but I think he should have gone away for a few years



Big Dave (OZ)
over nine years ago

Lots of questions with this one:

Would they have done this if they were by themselves? NO, cowards always need the support of other cowards.

Was alcohol involved? Probably.

Would a stronger sentence be a deterrent from other stupid, alcohol related pranks? Probably not.

Was race a factor? Possibly.If the victim hadn\'t been Asian and likely smaller than the attacker, the result would have been different.

I believe 20 years would have been too much, but community service was not enough.

At the very least he should have to start every conversation with this phrase, \"My actions resulted in the death of an innocent\".