Wrong Loong, Wrong act... tsk tsk

[Jonnybravo]

.. like that 7 years. the hit n run only 1 year ...

 

I think the main difference is "intention".

 

For the hit-and-run, there was no intention. It was an accident due to negligence.

 

For this cheeko siao kia. He did it on purpose. there was a direct intention.

[Luckcent]

I beg to differ..What if the driver wants to hit and run intentionally.( for ex. if the victim is his enemy )

[Jonnybravo]

Obviously, the driver has no intention to hit the old lady. unless you can prove that the driver indeed has some quarrel with the old lady and uses his vehicle as a weapon against her with the intention to cause hurt or death, then it will amount ot manslaughter or even murder.

 

if you can prove so, it will be a totally different charge.

Edited December 5, 2007 by Jonnybravo

[Luckcent]

In this case of hit and run is obvious....no argument on that..But i differ to the point made IF ( with intention ) then it will be a different scenario.

[Jonnybravo]

sorry I totally don't understand what you're trying to get through here.

 

"But i differ to ("on" the point you mean?) the point made (that) IF ( with intention ) then it will be a different scenario.

 

bah... don't understand.

[Luckcent]

my apologies if i have misled you. On the point if with intention to hit and run.....then it will be different. With reference to this particular case I have no comment. In fact I know the woman who got killed and have spoken to her the week before. Sad case.

[Gnoikj]

Issues of law...thnk goodness its quite clear cut here...

 

If the prosecution cannot prove any kind of link between the accused and victim, then it is taken as the accident is REALLY an accident...no grudges between the 2 prior to accident...

 

IF investigations reveal something remotely resembling a MOTIVE... then prosecution can build a case of murder...

 

BTW, the term intentional accident is an oxymoron...put together, it contradicts itself...

[Luckcent]

Agreed totally.

[Jonnybravo]

oh.. yes yes. i believe we are one the same train of thoughts...

[Jonnybravo]

on a 2nd note... i think the issue here is that... is a 1 year jail sentence sufficient for this case. Clearly the driver has challenged the law by driving straight after a suspension, driving without a valid license, and i believe he was drunk driving although it cannot be proven.

[Melissa]

[reply]

Ang was also charged with cheating a cashier by switching the $76.70 price tag on a can of protein supplements with a $29 tag.

 

[reply]

 

Haha maybe he became too high 'urge' by taking so much protein...

Edited December 5, 2007 by Melissa

[Luckcent]

Think the sentence should be heavier because he was already suspended from driving when the accident occurs. That means he broke the law twice.

[Louislim]

I wonder what happen to the guy who test drive the Mazda 5 and killed the SE ? How long was he sentence ah ? any bro still rmbs ? law just sux big time, i really wonder if he broke the law twice yet giving a minimal sentence ? what the hell going on in this world.

[Luckcent]

That guy who killed the mazda se is really an ar**** hole. Needless to say he got a sentence. But how long I could not remember. A lot of youngsters ( or cheongsters ) need to be shot in my opinion.