this post was submitted on 02 Oct 2023
414 points (96.0% liked)

News

23376 readers
2137 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

A New York judge sentenced a woman who pleaded guilty to fatally shoving an 87-year-old Broadway singing coach onto a Manhattan sidewalk to six months more in prison than the eight years that had been previously reached in a plea deal.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Nevoic@lemm.ee 25 points 1 year ago (8 children)

What's actually being punished? Would she have been sentenced to 8.5 years in prison if she pushed an 87 year old who was slightly less frail and instead of dying sustained major injuries? Would she have been sentenced if she pushed an extraordinarily healthy 87 year old who knew how to gracefully fall and sustained no serious injuries?

It seems that the act of pushing alone isn't enough to sentence a person to nearly a decade in prison. There was likely no intention to kill, though that was the outcome. What if she sneezed on the 87 year old, and in a fit of panic the 87 year old fell over and died? Again, no intention to kill, though that would still be the outcome.

I think it's clear this should be punished more intensely than sneezing, pushing an old person would very commonly result in serious injury, so this is definitely assault.

[–] KeenSnappersDontCome@lemmy.world 42 points 1 year ago (3 children)

For cases where injury was sustained there is legal doctrine know as the Eggshell skull rule

The rule states that, in a tort case, the unexpected frailty of the injured person is not a valid defense to the seriousness of any injury caused to them.

[–] Sharpiemarker@feddit.de 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What an odd rule! Thank you for the explanation.

[–] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago

I think the idea is the actual damages aren't going to go down just because the person was frail. Someone with prexisting medical problems aren't going to need less physical therapy compared to someone who is average.

[–] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

This wasn't a tort case.

This is a simple case of assault in which someone unintentionally died. It's textbook manslaughter.

[–] troglodytis@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Sure sure, but 87 year olds are expected to be frail. It's what they normally do.

[–] Perfide@reddthat.com 37 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Again, no intention to kill, though that would still be the outcome

No it wouldn't, you have to prove intention to kill for a murder charge. This is manslaughter, a lesser but still very serious charge. Killing someone on accident is still a crime, shocker, I know.

[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 14 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Killing someone on accident is still a crime, shocker, I know.

Unless you do it with a car. Then you have a 90% chance of getting off Scott free.

[–] RagingRobot@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

So a car is a good way to go then for all of your manslaughtering needs

[–] Chainweasel@lemmy.world 24 points 1 year ago

pushing an old person would very commonly result in serious injury.

This is why she's being punished. You cannot assault an 87 year old without expecting serious injury or death. Just like you can grab a 20 year old and shake them by the shoulders and they'll be fine, but if you do the same to an infant they're probably going to die.

[–] ChaoticEntropy@feddit.uk 22 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

I direct you to comments below, detailing the circumstances. She got drunk, became increasingly belligerent and violent... then took out her rage on this random old woman viciously. She showed no remorse, to the point of sociopathy.

https://feddit.uk/comment/3105205

Edit: In hindsight, I'm unclear if you're suggesting she should see a longer or shorter sentence.

[–] instamat@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (3 children)

She was out celebrating 100 days until she got married, why does every mundane thing have to be celebrated? Just go out and have a good time with your fiancé. You don’t need an excuse.

we just have an alcohol epidemic. people feel the need to make an excuse to binge drink as much as possible.

[–] Mafflez@reddthat.com 2 points 1 year ago

Celebrating...100 days till marriage? That is fucking stupid.

[–] ChaoticEntropy@feddit.uk 1 points 1 year ago

Suuure... that is the real highlight of this story, the worst thing she did that night. >.>'

[–] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Holy fuck, what an unhinged person. Bad person right from reacting to "we close at 11" with aggression, but then just escalates it irrationally from there. Throws her food on her fiance (I'm guessing maybe he had the gall to tell her to chill out, or maybe he was just there and she thought he was a safe target), and then goes out and attacks an elderly woman because she "thought she might say something". Then later meets up with her fiance again and blames him for "ruining the night" when it was all her own insane reaction to being told a place was closing and they'd have to hurry up.

Is she the avatar of the shitty entitled aggressive consumer who blames everyone else for their problems? Fuck her and everything about her.

Her sentence might only be 8.5 years but with her anger management skills, it'll probably get increased. Though she'll be locked up with a bunch of people who aren't on their 80s, so she might not survive her next tantrum.

[–] ChaoticEntropy@feddit.uk 0 points 1 year ago

Is she the avatar of the shitty entitled aggressive consumer who blames everyone else for their problems?

Well... from the descriptions of her actions, it seems like she has undiagnosed and untreated mental health issues. Which is kind of an even sadder indictment of society.

[–] Anamnesis@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago

This is the problem of moral luck. We often want to punish people more because factors outside of the perpetrator's control turned out badly. Either we should punish everybody harshly when they push an elderly person, whether or not it injures them, or someone like this should get a pretty light sentence. Yet we have an irrational pull to treat the cases differently.

[–] MightEnlightenYou@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So you're saying that you don't understand what manslaughter is. You ask a lot of questions, but I get the feeling that you're not the type of person that is actually looking for answers

[–] MooseBoys@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

you're saying that you don't understand what manslaughter is

No, they’re just saying that instead of manslaughter being a more severe charge than assault, maybe it should be lessened to be equivalent. Similarly, maybe attempted murder should carry a charge equivalent to actual murder.

[–] Curiousaur@lemmynsfw.com 4 points 1 year ago

Muder is murder. Manslaughter is manslaughter. Intention, knowledge, negligence, does not matter for manslaughter, unless the intention was to kill, which upgrades it to muder instead.

[–] bobman@unilem.org -5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Sneezing on someone? No crime.

Pushing someone? Crime.

This is why you're not a lawyer and should never have any say in legal proceedings.

Stay in your lemmy fantasy world with the rest of the mentally ill.

[–] NESSI3@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 year ago

You don't have to be a dick about it Bob.