General Chat

PatrickM, in one case the jury could not be certain that the death was intentionally caused.. In the other case it was clearly murder. The sentence for the murder was a minimum of nine years not life.

She didn't say it was OK, she said that cultural differences should be taken into account and that education was the key.

I can't understand the justice.

In both cases a life was taken, the sentence given should be the same.

Talking of our justice system, according to a senior judge, a woman to boot, it is OK for a man to beat his wife and children if it is part of their "culture".

So was I. He was a committed Christian as was she. He had said he wanted to die in his own time, it was not his wish to be smothered. therefore she not only broke the law but, if he was as she says her friend, she betrayed his wishes.

I was just about to post something similar Guinevere.

The Guardian report is here:
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jun/05/woman-jailed-mercy-killing-cancer-patient

The woman killed the man without his consent. His family say it wasn't what he wanted and are very upset at not saying goodbye to him.

There is far more to that case than a mercy killing. Read about it and see if you still think she should have escaped jail.

Prisoners attacking other prisoners is not justice either.

Our justice system sucks, the sentencing is really haphazard and so often unjust. That poor little girl suffered so badly, those who loved her must be devastated at what she went through only for her evil aunt and grandmother to get away with what they did. Hope they get their comeuppance inside from other prisoners.
Rest in peace, little one.

I was shocked at the sentence given to the other lady, shouldn't have been jailed.

Lizx

On the news recently, a grandmother and aunt who tortured and neglected a little girl to death were given sentences one might expect for a robbery, even with no violence involved.

A woman who had been so distressed at seeing the suffering of a dying friend had called Samaritans (I think) to say how distressed she was and how she was wanting to end his suffering by smothering him with his pillow and then went ahead and did so although she was advised otherwise was given a life term.

I am sure somebody must understand the justice here. Could they explain it to me please.