2 chavs who killed a man will probably get prison sentence

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by BuggerAll, Mar 4, 2008.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. BuggerAll

    BuggerAll LE Reviewer Book Reviewer

    This has been pretty widely reported today. 2 teenagers who admitted to killing a man have been warned that they are likely to get a custodial sentence. My outrage-o-meter cranks up every time I hear this on the news. The starting point in sentencing should be life - meaning life. Then look at mitigation.


    Two teenagers have admitted killing a man in a row over litter.

    Evren Anil was threatened with a knife and punched when confronting one of the youths who threw a half-eaten chocolate bar through his sister's car window.

    Mr Anil, 23, hit his head on the pavement during the row in Crystal Palace, south-east London, last August, and died eight days later.

    The youths, aged 16 and 17, who cannot be named, pleaded guilty to manslaughter at the Old Bailey.

    They were remanded in custody and will be sentenced on 4 April.

    I have been unable to sleep at night as the recollections give me nightmares
    Elif Anil

    Death 'shattered family'

    In a victim impact statement Mr Anil's sister, Elif, called the teenagers "two heartless cowards" who carried out a "vicious and callous attack".

    Mr Anil, of Upper Norwood, south-east London, suffered head injuries and fell into a coma as a result of the attack on 5 August, 2007.

    He was with his 26-year-old sister, who was driving the car, when teenagers threw rubbish through an open window at a set of traffic lights.

    Miss Anil said the incident had "shattered" her family, resulting in her parents separating.

    She added that her brother's death had left her suffering from depression, and her caused her other brothers to require psychiatric treatment.

    Custody 'appropriate'

    Miss Anil said: "I have been unable to sleep at night as the recollections give me nightmares."

    The 17-year-old admitted throwing a chocolate bar wrapper through the window of Mr Anil's car, the court heard.

    Jo Korner QC, prosecuting, said: "Having done so the defendant was confronted by the deceased and a verbal dispute ensued.

    "There was some physical contact between the two involving the deceased grabbing the defendant's T-shirt. This resulted in the defendant punching the deceased."

    People are entitled to challenge these yobs' behaviour
    Det Ch Insp Cliff Lyons

    She said the 17-year-old also admitted taking out a knife to frighten Mr Anil but claimed he did not intend to use it, then passed it to the other teenager.

    Miss Korner said the 16-year-old's version of events, that "at no stage did he threaten Mr Anil with a knife" and only used the weapon to threaten another man, was not accepted.

    The 16-year-old from Thornton Heath, south-east London, pleaded guilty to manslaughter and knife possession as his trial was due to begin at the Old Bailey on Monday.

    The 17-year-old from Tottenham, north London, admitted the two charges on Tuesday.

    Judge Ann Goddard said: "It seems to me custody is the appropriate outcome."

    Following the incident Det Ch Insp Cliff Lyons said: "He (Mr Anil) challenges their behaviour and this is what happens.

    "People are entitled to challenge these yobs' behaviour.

    "When they produced the knife he tried to get back in the car. Your life is worth more than a chocolate bar."

    Mr Anil, who was of Turkish origin, was in the first week of his job after graduating with a first class degree in computer science from Kingston University.
  2. Murder sentences are pathetic, the whole point of life meaning life was an humane alternative to the rope, but now it seems that has been forgotten.

    Manslaughter, like in this case, is even more pathetic. My guess is they will serve 3 years, or get 3 years.

    You can get a longer sentence holding up a post office with a water pistol, though don't try it out to prove me wrong.
  3. "have been warned that they are likely to get a custodial sentence".

    So, I assume that they have been warned that they might not too? Even with a manslaughter charge they should bin the key in this case. I can imagine the scenario, I`ve been in situations like this, these bottom feeders have no respect for anything or anyone.

    What grips me is that they wont see their own complicity in the way they acted, and acted everyday before that. And above all, they have no fear of retribution.
  4. Christ almighty, and people still ask for the reasons I don't want to return to SE London once time served is up.
    Unfortunately, this seems to be the case across Britain, weak sentencing resulting in a lack of respect for the law or the (menial) punishments for breaking it. I'm only 25, and I couldn't imagine living life with the level of disregard to others that those only a few years younger appear to.

    Seeing things like this makes me wonder how anybody can call us "Great" Britain any more. Great? It's not even Alright.
  5. Well Lofty, it seems the Right h(ON)ourable Margeret Hodge wants to bin Great Britain, or at least one single celebration of it. Apparently, The Last Night of the Proms* does not represent the New Great Britain, in all all of its diversity.

    What thats got to do with weak sentencing I`ve not a clue, but I have a sneaky suspicion that they may be linked (somehow, somewhere).

    NB* I`ve never been to the Proms.
  6. Well considering where they are from I hope that they wind up in the prison I will work in if my HMPS application goes through....... cattle prod anyone??

  7. Be sure to throw a choccy wrapper through the cell hatch, see if they like your reaction when they complain about your lack of respect. I'll pop by when I'm on leave, be glad to help you out. :twisted:
  8. sure lofty, bring some vaseline with iron filings in it :lol:
  9. They could get lucky.

    Lucky like Craig Dodd and Ryan Palin. For months, they battered and terrorised a mentally disabled man, leaving him looking like this:-


    After beating him unconscious and chucking him in a river to drown they got life for manslaughter. The lucky bit was where their sentences were reduced to three and a half years on appeal.

    Even luckier was Nicholas Hague. He got 18 months for manslaughter. (That's right, less than 2 years for killing somebody).

    Due to early release rules and time spent on remand, he was released within a month of conviction. (That's right - less than a month in jail for killing somebody).

    To celebrate his freedom, he got pi$$ed on cider and kicked the sh1t out of a 60 year old woman, leaving her on life support:-


    But don't worry. Crime is at an all time low thanks to Labour.
  10. It makes my blood boil. Our government and the judges are far too soft on the scum in our society. Anyone that is guilty of behaviour like this should have their human rights withdrawn. I'm so sick of seeing a****holes get let off lightly. The situation in UK won't change until the government grows a set of balls and insists on harsher sentences. If that means that they have to pile crims 4,5 or 6 to a cell then so be it, they don't deserve anyones sympathy. It should be a case of punishment to fit the crime and if that means bringing back the death sentence then I'm all for it.
  11. BuggerAll

    BuggerAll LE Reviewer Book Reviewer

    If somebody is killed by another person(s) then the starting point of sentence should be life - meaning life. That sentence may be reduced because of mitigating circumstances.

    If two people get involved in a bit of argy bargee and all other things being equel, 1 pushes the other, he trips bangs his head and dies then actually I'd be quite happy to see the killer walk free, after all there but for the grace of an imaginary friend go I.

    However that's not what happened in this case. The killers went out armed. They instigated an incident with the victim, when he quite reasonably reacted they pulled a knife on him.

    Now they may not have set out to kill him, they may have lacked mens rea, but they show a degree of recklessness and to my mind premeditation.

    No doubt they would argue, or their lawyer would argue, that the knife was for self defence, but they initiated the incident and showed that they were more than prepared to use the knife when their cowardly attack did not go the way they expected.

    Had they not had the knife the victim may have been better able to defend himself and may not have ended up dead, so to my mind they should be treated as murderers and should be looking at a whole life tariff.

    This would also have the desired affect of sending out an appropiate message to other ne'er do wells.
  12. ...and this is how they manage to reassure you that crime's down

  13. Murdering chav scum have a devine purpose - they vote Labour.