2 cases. 2 completely different sentences

Did anyone else see these 2 cases from a couple of weeks ago?

The first was a young girl who lived with her mum. She seemingly split up with her boyfriend and then spent 6 months on a downward spiral of emotions, which then culminated in killing her mother (by strangling). She admitted manslaughter with dimished responsibilites - and was an otherwise bright/bubbly and good girl.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...ther-death.html


The other was a retired gas fitter who was diagnosed with terminal cancer. He started taking a concoction of cancer drugs which have been found to give 'Psychotic episodes' in around 1% of patients. This culminated in his smoothering his wife, then 'murdering' his daughter (with a hammer).

http://www.doncasterfreepress.co.uk/news...ghter-1-6375904

I know the stories aren't exactly the same but they do have many comparisons. 10 months for her and LIFE for him doesn't quite fit though does it??

I think the cases are (as almost any 2 will be and as you point out) sufficiently different as to be very hard to make a meaningful comparison.

Always remember that the reporting of anything in any media will have a slant to try to present a point of view/an angle.

I was surprised on reading the case of the man with cancer that he had been given such a long sentence, but I know nothing of the guidelines on sentencing or other factors that will have influenced the outcome.

It wasn't 'murder' of his daughter it was murder.

Murder carries a mandatory life sentence.

The first case was not murder.

OK, he still received a 12 year sentence for the manslaughter of his wife yet the girl got 10 months for manslaughter of her mum.

Erm... you seem to have missed that he killed his wife AND murdered his daughter.

The other girl "only" killed one person.

No, he was given 2 seperate sentences. 1 for the manslaughter of his wife (with dimished reponsibilies) and got a 12 year sentence. The murder of his daughter and got life, thus he gets a LIFE senstence with minumum of 17 years.

So if he had just killed his wife he would have had a 12 year sentence?

There seems to be absoletely no mention of perhaps the pharmaceutical company holding their hands up either which is a little worrying #putsdownthelemsip

Ah fair enough then. Well, the sentence will be based on ALL the facts of the case, and we don't know all of them.

It does seem pretty disporportionate.

You cannot say that if he had not murdered his daughter he would have still got the same sentence for manslaughter of his wife. The murder will have been one of the circumstances in determining the sentence, for example in revealing an intention to commit a violent act. Also risk to the public. That it was not a single incident suggests a greater likelihood of repetition of violence. Two people killed by a similar method, that required pre-planning, not a sudden unplanned response to a life incident.

From the CPS sentencing guidelines:

In cases where the evidence indicates that the accused's responsibility for his acts was so grossly impaired that his degree of responsibility for them was minimal, then a lenient course will be open to the judge. Provided that there is no danger of repetition of violence, it will usually be possible to make such an order as will give the accused his freedom possibly with some supervision.

There will also be psychiatric evidence that will have influenced the sentencing which we won't know about.