I agree. But this isn’t the first time a SWer was harmed by a client, where the sentence doesn’t seem to fit the seriousness of the crime. I have a hard time believing his story he didn’t think the gun had bullets, either. This sounds like attempted murder, to me.4 years is way too light.
The car rental company forcing the VICTIM who was shot to pay for cleaning her blood? Well fuck them too.
He also had an illegal firearm in concealed on himself, high on coke and drunk, in a residential neighbourhood, while his wife and kid slept in their home, then drove off after shooting this provider while drunk and high, fleeing the scene. This entire situation could have been much worse.That fucken Asshole, should of gotten min of 25 years. He shot a woman in the back. He made bad decisions and should pay for his crime. A lenient justice system is to blame.
There was a previous thread started where we discussed this case, obviously prior to this new development. I don’t think the justice system is “too lenient” as a rule. It’s too fucking blind and corrupt. The victim being a SW is paramount and unless there’s other dubious factors unknown, the sole reason for this sentence. It was clearly attempted murder by someone committing multiple offences and general awful behaviour. No jury would have come to this decision-I’m not a tinfoil hat guy but it doesn’t add up. Either there’s severe bias or something else is in play. As for the blood removal bill-I mentioned previously-the car company double dipped-they all do. They also filed an insurance claim and were likely reimbursed twice.He also had an illegal firearm in concealed on himself, high on coke and drunk, in a residential neighbourhood, while his wife and kid slept in their home, then drove off after shooting this provider while drunk and high, fleeing the scene. This entire situation could have been much worse.
Our justice system is way too lenient, I fully agree with you.
Corporal punishment seems great, since no one was ever wrongly convicted or even falsley accused and jailed in the history of Canada. /sYou wanna get rid of handguns, if they are used in a crime automatic 10 years, no probation, no parole. Make them work on a chain gang breaking rocks. Fuck human rights for criminals.
Bring back corporal punishment for minor crimes and make them get whipped in public. Singapore does this and they have a very low crime rate.
Too many video cameras today so likely people will be caught. You let the little crimes off, then the bigger crimes, where does it end. If we have laws and people break them, then why have laws at all? Most people are law abiding citizens until they get violated, then they become the worst offenders.Corporal punishment seems great, since no one was ever wrongly convicted or even falsley accused and jailed in the history of Canada. /s
Agree with the minimum on the handgun, especially for the discharge and assault of someone fleeing. The whole thing doesn't really add up, i still think the judge is taking shit for a behind the scenes deal.
Which authoritarians are the correct ones to be subservient to? Yours, mine, theirs? There are countries like Afghanistan where this is carried out, but they still break laws there.Too many video cameras today so likely people will be caught. You let the little crimes off, then the bigger crimes, where does it end. If we have laws and people break them, then why have laws at all? Most people are law abiding citizens until they get violated, then they become the worst offenders.
Peoples crimes started off, when they were allowed to mouth off back to authority.... They took an inch and see where we are today, you can shoot someone and get off with light to punishment. Don't get me started on young rich punks whose parents enable their kids.
It really doesn’t add up, I agree. There are some good points in here you have brought up.There was a previous thread started where we discussed this case, obviously prior to this new development. I don’t think the justice system is “too lenient” as a rule. It’s too fucking blind and corrupt. The victim being a SW is paramount and unless there’s other dubious factors unknown, the sole reason for this sentence. It was clearly attempted murder by someone committing multiple offences and general awful behaviour. No jury would have come to this decision-I’m not a tinfoil hat guy but it doesn’t add up. Either there’s severe bias or something else is in play. As for the blood removal bill-I mentioned previously-the car company double dipped-they all do. They also filed an insurance claim and were likely reimbursed twice.
If a white college girl who met a guy on tinder in this situation was shot in the exact same manor without prejudice or influence, the perp would be charged and convicted with attempted murder, among the other lesser offences. He’d do 7-10.
Agreed.Murder requires intent to kill, which can be very difficult to prove.
This incident should have brought several charges: careless use of firearm, possession of firearm for purpose, impaired driving and more.
Prosecutor and judge may both have been lazy or sexist.
This case deserves to be appealed.





