Teen who killed cyclist in DUI hit-and-run sentenced to 1 year, 10 days - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Bruhmis;48540325]or perhaps you need to stop overestimating its effect. I know dozens of people who've had criminal records since their early 20s who are also doing very well for themselves at a young age. all it really does is limit your career and travel options. do you really think a girl getting drunk and taking ecstasy had aspirations of being a globe trotting CEO? a year and a criminal record aren't enough to deter other people from continuing to do this shit, and no matter how loudly people cry "rehabilitation!", there are cultures around the world which simply cannot function without harsh consequences for crimes.[/QUOTE] It's been shown time and time again that punishments for crimes do not work as deterrents.

[QUOTE=chaz13;48554138]It's been shown time and time again that punishments for crimes do not work as deterrents.[/QUOTE] Such rich opinion, such detailed analysis.

[QUOTE=WarriorWounds;48554230]Such rich opinion, such detailed analysis.[/QUOTE] It's a fact, not an opinion. [url]http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2014/04/30/theres-still-no-evidence-that-executions-deter-criminals/[/url] [url]http://nccadp.org/issues/deterrence/[/url] [url]http://www.is.wayne.edu/StuartHenry/Effectiveness_of_Punishment.htm[/url] [url]http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/DonohueDeter.pdf[/url] [url]http://nij.gov/five-things/pages/deterrence.aspx[/url] And lastly a detailed lit review: [url]https://www.sentencingcouncil.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/publication-documents/Does%20Imprisonment%20Deter%20A%20Review%20of%20the%20Evidence.pdf[/url]

[QUOTE=chaz13;48554400]It's a fact, not an opinion. [url]http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2014/04/30/theres-still-no-evidence-that-executions-deter-criminals/[/url] [url]http://nccadp.org/issues/deterrence/[/url] [url]http://www.is.wayne.edu/StuartHenry/Effectiveness_of_Punishment.htm[/url] [url]http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/DonohueDeter.pdf[/url] [url]http://nij.gov/five-things/pages/deterrence.aspx[/url] And lastly a detailed lit review: [url]https://www.sentencingcouncil.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/publication-documents/Does%20Imprisonment%20Deter%20A%20Review%20of%20the%20Evidence.pdf[/url][/QUOTE] I want to give you a winner for actually posting sources I can read, thanks. Edit: You understand almost all of these are specifically about the death penalty's effectiveness towards deterrence and not general jail sentences like the one in this case yeah?

Yes, but increasing the severity of the punishments for her crimes is pretty irrelevant to this situation anyway as it's not going to stop anyone from committing the crime as it was accidental. She did not intend to kill anyone and if the possibility of doing so even crossed her mind I think it's reasonable to assume she would have thought twice about her actions. The last lit review is the most interesting of the sources anyway.

[QUOTE=leontodd;48511969]For everyone wondering why the sentence was only 1 year.[/QUOTE] Would not have mattered here. The female was charged with [URL="http://www.ktuu.com/news/news/girl-17-charged-as-adult-for-crash-that-killed-cyclist/27368062"]manslaughter originally[/URL], which is a certified offense (meaning shes seen as an adult). However, the juvenile's lawyer is good and knows how to game the courts (as most do). [quote]Separately, Ellis' lawyer, William Ingaldson, has asked the judge to consider whether his client, who was 17 at the time of the deadly crash, should instead be transferred to the juvenile system until she is 20 years old.[/quote] So 1 year and EJJ

[QUOTE=chaz13;48554442]The last lit review is the most interesting of the sources anyway.[/QUOTE] I agree, the research generated in that article does seem to agree that increased sentencing within its area of study has not shown additional deterrence in criminal behavior. Like with one of its conclusions it posted ex: [QUOTE]The evidence from empirical studies suggests that the threat of imprisonment generates a small general deterrent effect. However, the research also indicates that increases in the severity of penalties, such as increasing the length of imprisonment, do not produce a corresponding increase in the general deterrent effect.[/QUOTE] But there's a couple of other things about the article you need to consider. It doesn't outright condemn the purposes of prisons and the purposes they provide to the point of irrelevance like you claim, ex: [QUOTE]Imprisonment has its place in the criminal justice system. Lengthy terms of imprisonment may be justified to achieve the purposes of punishment and denunciation, to protect the community by the incapacitation of an offender or to provide time for rehabilitative treatment. In light of the empirical evidence, however, it is critical that the purposes of sentencing be considered independently – according to their own merits – and that caution be exercised when imprisonment is justified as a means of deterring all crimes and all kinds of offenders.[/QUOTE] It was a study conducted in one state of Australia, Victoria, not the United States, to try it uphold it as an indisputable fact over the state of the United States prison system is a bit foolhardy to me and completely wrong to me, especially with the way you posted all of those misplaced, death penalty argument articles next to it.

[QUOTE=WarriorWounds;48554546]I agree, the research generated in that article does seem to agree that increased sentencing within its area of study has not shown additional deterrence in criminal behavior. Like with one of its conclusions it posted ex: But there's a couple of other things about the article you need to consider. It doesn't outright condemn the purposes of prisons and the purposes they provide to the point of irrelevance like you claim, ex: It was a study conducted in one state of Australia, Victoria, not the United States, to try it uphold it as an indisputable fact over the state of the United States prison system is a bit foolhardy to me and completely wrong to me, especially with the way you posted all of those misplaced, death penalty argument articles next to it.[/QUOTE] Good thing nobody here says prisons are a bad concept.

[QUOTE=Aldawolf;48555149]Good thing nobody here says prisons are a bad concept.[/QUOTE] Obviously you do, if you are so desperate to rush the rehabilitation process to one year for manslaughter and negligence. The previous poster called them irrelevant,

[QUOTE=WarriorWounds;48556053]Obviously you do if you are so desperate to rush the rehabilitation process to one year for manslaughter and negligence.[/QUOTE] Good thing this wasn't a murder.

[QUOTE=Bruhmis;48540325]or perhaps you need to stop overestimating its effect. I know dozens of people who've had criminal records since their early 20s who are also doing very well for themselves at a young age. all it really does is limit your career and travel options. do you really think a girl getting drunk and taking ecstasy had aspirations of being a globe trotting CEO? a year and a criminal record aren't enough to deter other people from continuing to do this shit, and no matter how loudly people cry "rehabilitation!", there are cultures around the world which simply cannot function without harsh consequences for crimes.[/QUOTE] Do you really think taking a drug that isn't alcohol makes you ambition less? How judgemental and how incorrect.

[QUOTE=Aldawolf;48556061]Good thing this wasn't a murder.[/QUOTE] :disappoint: Edit: Hitting a person on the road, acknowledging it, and being content to just drive away is pretty cut n case sickening as fuck behavior to me, you can call it whatever you want to call it, it deserves more than a year in jail, what a sad jokes this case was, what a sad moral structure you must have to think that something that bad doesn't deserve more.

[QUOTE=WarriorWounds;48556078]:disappoint: Edit: Hitting a person on the road, acknowledging it, and being content to just drive away is pretty cut n case sickening as fuck behavior to me, you can call it whatever you want to call it, it deserves more than a year in jail, what a sad jokes this case was, what a sad moral structure you must have to think that something that bad doesn't deserve more.[/QUOTE] It wasn't murder because it wasn't premeditated. I'm pretty sure the woman didn't go out for a drive that night thinking 'yes I'm going to mow down a cyclist'. She got one year in prison because it's a balance between her not being a threat to society and having to assume some consequences for her actions. Generally, people locked up for twenty years include rapists and actual murderers. People who are actually threats to society. This woman isn't a threat to society. The biggest threat to society in this case are the people calling for her head and putting their emotions before fair justice. Really, should the west adopt a judicial system like what they use in Iran?

[QUOTE=Antdawg;48556197]It wasn't murder because it wasn't premeditated. I'm pretty sure the woman didn't go out for a drive that night thinking 'yes I'm going to mow down a cyclist'. She got one year in prison because it's a balance between her not being a threat to society and having to assume some consequences for her actions. Generally, people locked up for twenty years include rapists and actual murderers. People who are actually threats to society. This woman isn't a threat to society. The biggest threat to society in this case are the people calling for her head and putting their emotions before fair justice. Really, should the west adopt a judicial system like what they use in Iran?[/QUOTE] Premeditation isn't the necessity for murder, there are degrees of murder, first degree murder involves premeditation, third degree murder is spur of the moment out of rage or passion, I didn't even call it murder I called it manslaughter, if we want to get specific about manslaughter, a hit and run in my opinion is representative of voluntary manslaughter, the normal charges for voluntary manslaughter are this: [QUOTE]the federal law against voluntary manslaughter states that defendants should receive fines, a prison sentence of not more than ten years or both. Californias manslaughter law, on the other hand, gets a little more specific and states that anyone found guilty of manslaughter should receive a prison sentence of 3, 6 or 11 years. - See more at: [url]http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-charges/voluntary-manslaughter-penalties-and-sentencing.html#sthash.5HoqCNXs.dpuf[/url][/QUOTE] Trying to stick the idea of just forcing a person to undergo normal sentencing for a horrible crime doesn't conflate anybody with Iran's horrible system either, you must be grasping for straws for trying to conflate my views to that. Not even recieving 3 years in a liberal state like California for such a ridiculous crime is just astonishing.

[QUOTE=WarriorWounds;48556251]Premeditation isn't the necessity for murder, there are degrees of murder, first degree murder involves premeditation, third degree murder is spur of the moment out of rage or passion, I didn't even call it murder I called it manslaughter, if we want to get specific about manslaughter, a hit and run is voluntary manslaughter, the normal charges for voluntary manslaughter are this: Trying to stick the idea of just forcing a person to undergo normal sentencing for a horrible crime doesn't conflate anybody with Iran's horrible system either, you must be grasping for straws for trying to conflate my views to that. Not even recieving 3 years in a liberal state like California for such a ridiculous crime is just astonishing.[/QUOTE] Why the hell are you citing federal law and then California law.. this is Alaska. Cite Alaskan law.

[QUOTE=Code3Response;48556293]Why the hell are you citing federal law and then California law.. this is Alaska. Cite Alaskan law.[/QUOTE] I've been searching for Alaskan law on voluntary manslaughter, it isn't immediate available It should be available here, because it is a Class A felony, but I can't find it stipulated [url]http://touchngo.com/lglcntr/akstats/Statutes/Title12/Chapter55/Section125.htm[/url] Edit: Google hasn't helped me, all they have on it is this small snippet, it doesn't list sentencing. [url]http://www.touchngo.com/lglcntr/akstats/Statutes/Title11/Chapter41/Section120.htm[/url] [QUOTE]AS 11.41.120. Manslaughter. (a) A person commits the crime of manslaughter if the person (1) intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly causes the death of another person under circumstances not amounting to murder in the first or second degree; or (2) intentionally aids another person to commit suicide; or (3) knowingly manufactures or delivers a controlled substance in violation of AS 11.71.010 - 11.71.030 or 11.71.040(a)(1) for schedule IVA controlled substances, and a person dies as a direct result of ingestion of the controlled substance; the death is a result that does not require a culpable mental state; in this paragraph, "ingestion" means voluntarily or involuntarily taking a substance into the body in any manner. (b) Manslaughter is a class A felony.[/QUOTE] If somebody else can find it please share, I posted the federal law because it's obviously still relevant, California is one of the leanest sentencing states in the country, their lowest available sentence for the crime is 3 years, also a relevant example for how ridiculous 1 year for this crime is.

[QUOTE=WarriorWounds;48556309]I've been searching for Alaskan law on voluntary manslaughter, it isn't immediate available It should be available here, because it is a Class A felony, but I can't find it stipulated [url]http://touchngo.com/lglcntr/akstats/Statutes/Title12/Chapter55/Section125.htm[/url] Edit: Google hasn't helped me, all they have on it is this small snippet, it doesn't list sentencing. [url]http://www.touchngo.com/lglcntr/akstats/Statutes/Title11/Chapter41/Section120.htm[/url] If somebody else can find it please share, I posted the federal law because it's obviously still relevant, California is one of the leanest sentencing states in the country, their lowest available sentence for the crime is 3 years, also a relevant example for how ridiculous 1 year for this crime is.[/QUOTE] I dont know what the fuck you've been searching, but on all the state's websites they have the statutes available. Just Google "StateName Statutes" and it should direct you to where to search and read them. Heres the applicable stuff. Bolding and brackets are of my own doing [quote]Sec. 11.41.130. Criminally negligent homicide. (a) A person commits the crime of criminally negligent homicide if, with criminal negligence, the person causes the death of another person. (b) Criminally negligent homicide is a class B felony.[/quote] [quote](12.55.125)Except as provided in (i [sexual assault]) of this section, a defendant convicted of a class B felony may be sentenced to a definite term of imprisonment of not more than 10 years, and shall be sentenced to a definite term within the following presumptive ranges, subject to adjustment as provided in AS 12.55.155 - 12.55.175: (1) [B]if the offense is a first felony conviction and does not involve circumstances described in (2) of this subsection, one to three years;[/B] a defendant sentenced under this paragraph may, if the court finds it appropriate, be granted a suspended imposition of sentence under AS 12.55.085 if, as a condition of probation under AS 12.55.086, the defendant is required to serve an active term of imprisonment within the range specified in this paragraph, unless the court finds that a mitigation factor under AS 12.55.155 applies; (2) if the offense is a first felony conviction, (A) the defendant violated AS 11.41.130, and the victim was a child under 16 years of age, two to four years; (B) two to four years if the conviction is for an attempt, solicitation, or conspiracy to manufacture related to methamphetamine under AS 11.31 and AS 11.71.020(a)(2)(A) or (B), and (i) the attempted manufacturing occurred, or the solicited or conspired offense was to have occurred, in a building with reckless disregard that the building was used as a permanent or temporary home or place of lodging for one or more children under 18 years of age or the building was a place frequented by children; or (ii) in the course of an attempt to manufacture, the defendant obtained the assistance of one or more children under 18 years of age or one or more children were present; (3) if the offense is a second felony conviction, four to seven years; (4) if the offense is a third felony conviction, six to 10 years.[/quote]

[QUOTE=Antdawg;48556197]It wasn't murder because it wasn't premeditated. I'm pretty sure the woman didn't go out for a drive that night thinking 'yes I'm going to mow down a cyclist'. She got one year in prison because it's a balance between her [B]not being a threat to society[/B][/QUOTE] What the fuck are you talking about? She killed a person, she could have killed more than one person. Given the statistics on how often drinkers actually drive drunk, who knows how many times she had before without being caught. Regardless of actually killing someone or not, drunk drivers need to lose their license and be charged with attempted murder (a blind man shoots a gun down a crowded hallway etc), current DUI penalties are a fucking disgrace.

[QUOTE=Code3Response;48556613]I dont know what the fuck you've been searching, but on all the state's websites they have the statutes available. Just Google "StateName Statutes" and it should direct you to where to search and read them. Heres the applicable stuff. Bolding and brackets are of my own doing[/QUOTE] If you want to change the definition of what I was searching for then of course it is easy to find something, holy shit you halfwit. Like I literally posted two links to the website you are saying that I neglected to check, basically confirms you didn't even try to read my post. Find the specifics for sentencing of voluntary manslaughter in Alaska, not criminal negligence. edit: If this is just going to come down to a debate as to if the crime wasn't voluntary manslaughter, then I don't think we are going to come to any sort of consensus, I think its fairly evident that's what this is, if you don't then we can agree to disagree, I'm just looking for the facts here on that subject, not your opinion on what you think the crime should be.