Quote:

A Noble Park man, whose dangerous driving caused the death of an unborn baby, has been sentenced to three years and five months in jail. Judge Meryl Sexton told the court Amrick Thind, 23, was driving aggressively, weaving in and out of traffic along Warrigal Road in Oakleigh, Victoria when he suddenly changed lanes, clipping a four-wheel drive and sending it veering head on into Hannah Robert's car. Ms Robert was eight months pregnant and lost her unborn baby daughter in the crash. Four other people were also injured. Judge Sexton said she did not accept Thind had made a "split second" decision to change lanes, but rather had taken "unnecessary risks" in driving too close to the car in front. "The way in which you were driving caused irreversible and heartbreaking changes to the lives of a number of those people," she said. She said no-one could fail to be touched by the eloquent and powerful statements of Ms Robert and her partner about the loss of their baby girl. "Slowly, they have recovered from their physical injuries. It will take much longer for their emotional healing," she said. In sentencing Thind, Judge Sexton told the court she accepted his remorse, but said it was lessened by his decision to flee the scene after he saw the collision. "I must state clearly that conduct of the kind you engaged in will not be tolerated," she said. Thind pleaded guilty to five counts of dangerous driving causing serious injury and failing to stop at the scene of an accident. He will serve a non-parole period of two years and three months. He has been ordered to pay $6,523 for damage to Ms Robert's car, and is likely to face deportation after his release from prison.

So if he can be punsihed for accidentally causing the death of an unborn babay, what of those who wilfully do so?

No he wasnt Wes.  No charges of manslaughter or murder there, not even dangerous driving causing death.

And as far as Im concerned, the baby was only a month of being due.  Its hardly abortion at that time dont you think.

The asshole should have got aleast another 10 for manslaughter in my book.  If my wife lost our baby because of someone like this, it would be me doing time.

Verge wrote on Nov 16^th, 2010 at 4:44pm:

No he wasnt Wes.  No charges of manslaughter or murder there, not even dangerous driving causing death. And as far as Im concerned, the baby was only a month of being due.  Its hardly abortion at that time dont you think. The asshole should have got aleast another 10 for manslaughter in my book.  If my wife lost our baby because of someone like this, it would be me doing time.

Not officially, but the sentence, in comparison to others on the same charges suggests he was, in actuality, punished for causing the death of the unborn child.

So you are equating the tragic death of an eight month old foetus that was planned  for and wanted by the parents to removing a cluster of unwanted cells ?

darkhall67 wrote on Nov 16^th, 2010 at 5:02pm:

So you are equating the tragic death of an eight month old foetus that was planned  for and wanted by the parents to removing a cluster of unwanted cells ?

What a lovely way to view the beginning of a new life.

... wrote on Nov 16^th, 2010 at 4:28pm:

Quote: A Noble Park man, whose dangerous driving caused the death of an unborn baby, has been sentenced to three years and five months in jail. Judge Meryl Sexton told the court Amrick Thind, 23, was driving aggressively, weaving in and out of traffic along Warrigal Road in Oakleigh, Victoria when he suddenly changed lanes, clipping a four-wheel drive and sending it veering head on into Hannah Robert's car. Ms Robert was eight months pregnant and lost her unborn baby daughter in the crash. Four other people were also injured. Judge Sexton said she did not accept Thind had made a "split second" decision to change lanes, but rather had taken "unnecessary risks" in driving too close to the car in front. "The way in which you were driving caused irreversible and heartbreaking changes to the lives of a number of those people," she said. She said no-one could fail to be touched by the eloquent and powerful statements of Ms Robert and her partner about the loss of their baby girl. "Slowly, they have recovered from their physical injuries. It will take much longer for their emotional healing," she said. In sentencing Thind, Judge Sexton told the court she accepted his remorse, but said it was lessened by his decision to flee the scene after he saw the collision. "I must state clearly that conduct of the kind you engaged in will not be tolerated," she said. Thind pleaded guilty to five counts of dangerous driving causing serious injury and failing to stop at the scene of an accident. He will serve a non-parole period of two years and three months. He has been ordered to pay $6,523 for damage to Ms Robert's car, and is likely to face deportation after his release from prison. So if he can be punsihed for accidentally causing the death of an unborn babay, what of those who wilfully do so?

Youre right
It would appear that the sentencing judge took into account the unborn.
And if any portion of his sentence whatsoever is due to the unborn dying then yes, abortionists and mothers having an abortion should also be prosecuted.

... wrote on Nov 16^th, 2010 at 5:03pm:

darkhall67 wrote on Nov 16th, 2010 at 5:02pm: So you are equating the tragic death of an eight month old foetus that was planned  for and wanted by the parents to removing a cluster of unwanted cells ? What a lovely way to view the beginning of a new life.

Does reality have to be viewed through a rosy hued lens?

darkhall67 wrote on Nov 16^th, 2010 at 5:20pm:

... wrote on Nov 16th, 2010 at 5:03pm: darkhall67 wrote on Nov 16th, 2010 at 5:02pm: So you are equating the tragic death of an eight month old foetus that was planned  for and wanted by the parents to removing a cluster of unwanted cells ? What a lovely way to view the beginning of a new life. Does reality have to be viewed through a rosy hued lens?

Of course not, but conversely doesn't have to viewed through a poo-stained lens either.

I fail to see any brown colour in my previous posts.

Perhaps your glasses are dirty.

perhaps you deliberately try to dehumanise the 'bunch of unwanted cells' to assuage any guilt you may have about snuffing them out?

... wrote on Nov 16^th, 2010 at 5:29pm:

perhaps you deliberately try to dehumanise the 'bunch of unwanted cells' to assuage any guilt you may have about snuffing them out?

A human aint a human unless it has a brain  (insert witty comment about my brain here).

darkhall67 wrote on Nov 16^th, 2010 at 6:15pm:

... wrote on Nov 16th, 2010 at 5:29pm: perhaps you deliberately try to dehumanise the 'bunch of unwanted cells' to assuage any guilt you may have about snuffing them out? A human aint a human unless it has a brain  (insert witty comment about my brain here).

And the brain forms in a foetus after only a couple of weeks.  

... wrote on Nov 16^th, 2010 at 6:19pm:

darkhall67 wrote on Nov 16th, 2010 at 6:15pm: ... wrote on Nov 16th, 2010 at 5:29pm: perhaps you deliberately try to dehumanise the 'bunch of unwanted cells' to assuage any guilt you may have about snuffing them out? A human aint a human unless it has a brain  (insert witty comment about my brain here). And the brain forms in a foetus after only a couple of weeks.

Right! That explains why some people were allowed to survive and became GREEN voters.

darkhall67 wrote on Nov 16^th, 2010 at 6:15pm:

... wrote on Nov 16th, 2010 at 5:29pm: perhaps you deliberately try to dehumanise the 'bunch of unwanted cells' to assuage any guilt you may have about snuffing them out? A human aint a human unless it has a brain  (insert witty comment about my brain here).

Such an attempt to draw a line in the sand is purely artificial, what we do know is that life begins at conception.

And that is where the human begins its cycle.

... wrote on Nov 16^th, 2010 at 6:19pm:

darkhall67 wrote on Nov 16th, 2010 at 6:15pm: ... wrote on Nov 16th, 2010 at 5:29pm: perhaps you deliberately try to dehumanise the 'bunch of unwanted cells' to assuage any guilt you may have about snuffing them out? A human aint a human unless it has a brain  (insert witty comment about my brain here). And the brain forms in a foetus after only a couple of weeks.

http://brainmind.com/FetalBrainDevelopment.html

"The human brainstem is fashioned around the 7th week of gestation and matures in a caudal to rostral arc thereby forming the medulla, pons, and midbrain. The medulla mediates arousal, breathing, heart rate, and gross movement of the body and head, and medullary functions appear prior to those of the pons which precede those of the midbrain. Hence, by the 9th gestational week the fetus will display spontaneous movements, one week later takes its first breath, and by the 25th week demonstrates stimulus-induced heart rate accelerations. As the pons, which is later to mature, mediates arousal, body movements, and vestibular and vibroacoustic perception, from around the 20th to 27th weeks the fetus responds with arousal and body movements to vibroacoustic and loud sounds delivered to the maternal abdomen. The midbrain inferior-auditory followed by the superior-visual colliculi is the last to mature, and in conjunction with the lower brainstem makes fine auditory discriminations, and reacts to sound with fetal heart rate (FHR) accelerations, head turning, and eye movements--around the 36th week."

Yep keep drawing that line in the sand

Wesley made a claim about foetal brain development .

It was wrong.

I corrected it.

I cant believe you are trying to draw comparisons when the guy was never charged and convicted over the death, this is fact.

It may have been a factor in the sentencing, but its not like the sentence was outside the maximum penalty either.

Its a very very very long bow you are drawing, but not a correct one.

Until I seen manslaughter in there, it doesnt compare.

It was included in the judges sentencing summation so it had some weight!

tickfen wrote on Nov 16^th, 2010 at 6:57pm:

It was included in the judges sentencing summation so it had some weight!

Weight for maybe dealing out a sentence closer to the maximum, but the sentence was not higher than the maximum

Verge wrote on Nov 16^th, 2010 at 6:59pm:

tickfen wrote on Nov 16th, 2010 at 6:57pm: It was included in the judges sentencing summation so it had some weight! Weight for maybe dealing out a sentence closer to the maximum, but the sentence was not higher than the maximum

So without that comment then the sentence would have been lighter.

tickfen wrote on Nov 16^th, 2010 at 7:06pm:

Verge wrote on Nov 16th, 2010 at 6:59pm: tickfen wrote on Nov 16th, 2010 at 6:57pm: It was included in the judges sentencing summation so it had some weight! Weight for maybe dealing out a sentence closer to the maximum, but the sentence was not higher than the maximum So without that comment then the sentence would have been lighter.

Could very well have been.  They use them in the justifications of the sentencing determination.

tickfen wrote on Nov 16^th, 2010 at 6:27pm:

Such an attempt to draw a line in the sand is purely artificial, what we do know is that life begins at conception.

Well... According to the bible, God is behind the begining of life.
According to science, life began long before god.



tickfen wrote on Nov 16^th, 2010 at 6:27pm:

And that is where the human begins its cycle.

Ahhh, some humanism (embryoism/fetusism), or is that religion talking?

So does every human (embryo/fetus) deserve the right to 'live', as they do the right to 'life'?

darkhall67 wrote on Nov 16^th, 2010 at 6:36pm:

Wesley made a claim about foetal brain development . It was wrong. I corrected it.

Not it wasn't and no you didn't.

All very well listing the timeline when the (existing brain) gains certian functions, bu the fact remains that the brain still exists, from about 3 weeks after conception i believe.



Quote:

A human aint a human unless it has a brain

I would hope this is regardless of whether the brian possesses certian functions, otherwise it raises questions over how 'human' you consider the retarded and/or brain damaged in addition to unborn children.

No.

I mean a functioning brain and nervous system capable of thought .

... wrote on Nov 16^th, 2010 at 5:03pm:

darkhall67 wrote on Nov 16th, 2010 at 5:02pm: So you are equating the tragic death of an eight month old foetus that was planned  for and wanted by the parents to removing a cluster of unwanted cells ? What a lovely way to view the beginning of a new life.

A life you would argue, elsewhere, had no right to exist in the FIRST place




ROAD rage has been blamed for the death of an unborn girl and destroying the dream of a woman who battled to have a baby.

The mother says her de facto wife and two stepdaughters are slowly dealing with the pain allegedly caused by an Indian driver pursuing a man who made an obscene hand gesture.

"My de facto wife and I lost our little girl . . . I don't want our family to be invisible (but) we have enough pain and injuries to deal with," she said.

The 33-year-old woman said she had tried for four years to conceive through an assisted pregnancy program.

"My de facto wife (I can't call her my wife because in this country we cannot marry) and I had spent nearly four years getting to know our sperm donor, undertaking tests and trying to get me pregnant using assisted conception


http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/mums-pain-as-road-rage-blamed-for-crash/story-e6frf7jo-1225817155287

buzzanddidj wrote on Nov 17^th, 2010 at 6:03am:

... wrote on Nov 16th, 2010 at 5:03pm: darkhall67 wrote on Nov 16th, 2010 at 5:02pm: So you are equating the tragic death of an eight month old foetus that was planned  for and wanted by the parents to removing a cluster of unwanted cells ? What a lovely way to view the beginning of a new life. A life you would argue, elsewhere, had no right to exist in the FIRST place ROAD rage has been blamed for the death of an unborn girl and destroying the dream of a woman who battled to have a baby. The mother says her de facto wife and two stepdaughters are slowly dealing with the pain allegedly caused by an Indian driver pursuing a man who made an obscene hand gesture. "My de facto wife and I lost our little girl . . . I don't want our family to be invisible (but) we have enough pain and injuries to deal with," she said. The 33-year-old woman said she had tried for four years to conceive through an assisted pregnancy program. "My de facto wife (I can't call her my wife because in this country we cannot marry) and I had spent nearly four years getting to know our sperm donor, undertaking tests and trying to get me pregnant using assisted conception http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/mums-pain-as-road-rage-blamed-for-crash/story-e6frf7jo-1225817155287

It pisses me off no end.  At such a late stage the mongrel should be charged with manslaughter in the minimum.

Makes you really wonder what kind of true remorse the driver has.  In his pursuit to give someone the finger he has destroyed a family and a woman who has carried that baby.

All over cutting someone off.  Really makes you wonder about where this country is heading.

I will say though, highlighting her partner is a non issue Buzz.  I couldnt care less if she was a lesbian or not.  She was an expectant mother, and that is it.  Her sexuality doesnt make it anymore more or less.

buzzanddidj wrote on Nov 17^th, 2010 at 6:03am:

... wrote on Nov 16th, 2010 at 5:03pm: darkhall67 wrote on Nov 16th, 2010 at 5:02pm: So you are equating the tragic death of an eight month old foetus that was planned  for and wanted by the parents to removing a cluster of unwanted cells ? What a lovely way to view the beginning of a new life. A life you would argue, elsewhere, had no right to exist in the FIRST place ROAD rage has been blamed for the death of an unborn girl and destroying the dream of a woman who battled to have a baby. The mother says her de facto wife and two stepdaughters are slowly dealing with the pain allegedly caused by an Indian driver pursuing a man who made an obscene hand gesture. "My de facto wife and I lost our little girl . . . I don't want our family to be invisible (but) we have enough pain and injuries to deal with," she said. The 33-year-old woman said she had tried for four years to conceive through an assisted pregnancy program. "My de facto wife (I can't call her my wife because in this country we cannot marry) and I had spent nearly four years getting to know our sperm donor, undertaking tests and trying to get me pregnant using assisted conception http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/mums-pain-as-road-rage-blamed-for-crash/story-e6frf7jo-1225817155287

But it DID exist buzz.

Wes, just so I know where you stand, are you anti abortion or anti abortion after a certain point?

I have no problem with abortion in the following circumstances only:

1.  Where the child would have severe deformation or retardation.
2. Where keeping the child would risk the life of the mother.
3. Where the child is the product of rape.

Wesley, what about mental illness in the mother? Or extreme poverty? Consensual incest that has resulted in a pregnancy?

Buzz, do you really think the baby had no right to life because it's parents were gay? That's a pretty revolting point of view.

Annie Anthrax wrote on Nov 17^th, 2010 at 10:18am:

Wesley, what about mental illness in the mother? Or extreme poverty? Consensual incest that has resulted in a pregnancy? Buzz, do you really think the baby had no right to life because it's parents were gay? That's a pretty revolting point of view.

I don't think EXTREME poverty is an issue in australia.  In the Mumbai slums, yes I suppose it could be a big issue, but we have enough welfare available to mean that noone should be able to use that excuse.  Unfortunately, the services aren't available where they are needed...can' t imagine the free healthcare system in Mumbai would be upto much, but here, it's available on demand for those who don't need it half as much.

Must say I've never thought about consensual incest...but I would imagine if it was consensual, they probably wouldn't have any qualms about having a child to them.  Probably a dash of mental illness in there too.  

Mental illness in itself I wouldn't think as grounds for abortion, unless is was highly likely to manifest in the child too, thus falling under the banner of severe deformation or retardation.  Theres always adoption if they're mentally unfit to look after it.

Quote:

Wesley, what about mental illness in the mother? Or extreme poverty? Consensual incest that has resulted in a pregnancy?

Women should receive monetary incentives to abort in these instances. ;)

tickfen wrote on Nov 16^th, 2010 at 5:04pm:

... wrote on Nov 16th, 2010 at 4:28pm: Quote: A Noble Park man, whose dangerous driving caused the death of an unborn baby, has been sentenced to three years and five months in jail. Judge Meryl Sexton told the court Amrick Thind, 23, was driving aggressively, weaving in and out of traffic along Warrigal Road in Oakleigh, Victoria when he suddenly changed lanes, clipping a four-wheel drive and sending it veering head on into Hannah Robert's car. Ms Robert was eight months pregnant and lost her unborn baby daughter in the crash. Four other people were also injured. Judge Sexton said she did not accept Thind had made a "split second" decision to change lanes, but rather had taken "unnecessary risks" in driving too close to the car in front. "The way in which you were driving caused irreversible and heartbreaking changes to the lives of a number of those people," she said. She said no-one could fail to be touched by the eloquent and powerful statements of Ms Robert and her partner about the loss of their baby girl. "Slowly, they have recovered from their physical injuries. It will take much longer for their emotional healing," she said. In sentencing Thind, Judge Sexton told the court she accepted his remorse, but said it was lessened by his decision to flee the scene after he saw the collision. "I must state clearly that conduct of the kind you engaged in will not be tolerated," she said. Thind pleaded guilty to five counts of dangerous driving causing serious injury and failing to stop at the scene of an accident. He will serve a non-parole period of two years and three months. He has been ordered to pay $6,523 for damage to Ms Robert's car, and is likely to face deportation after his release from prison. So if he can be punsihed for accidentally causing the death of an unborn babay, what of those who wilfully do so? Youre right It would appear that the sentencing judge took into account the unborn. And if any portion of his sentence whatsoever is due to the unborn dying then yes, abortionists and mothers having an abortion should also be prosecuted.

But tickfen..mothers and doctors ARE charged if a baby is aborted at 8 months...so it's equal treatment...

Annie Anthrax wrote on Nov 17^th, 2010 at 10:18am:

Wesley, what about mental illness in the mother? Or extreme poverty? Consensual incest that has resulted in a pregnancy? Buzz, do you really think the baby had no right to life because it's parents were gay? That's a pretty revolting point of view.

No annie, I think buzz was arguing that OTHER posters have stated that the child shouldn't have been born, because the parents were gay...

Quote:

A Noble Park man, whose dangerous driving caused the death of an unborn baby, has been sentenced to three years and five months in jail. Judge Meryl Sexton told the court Amrick Thind, 23, was driving aggressively, weaving in and out of traffic along Warrigal Road in Oakleigh, Victoria when he suddenly changed lanes, [highlight]clipping a four-wheel drive and sending it veering head on into Hannah Robert's car[/highlight]. Ms Robert was eight months pregnant and lost her unborn baby daughter in the crash. Four other people were also injured. Judge Sexton said she did not accept Thind had made a "split second" decision to change lanes, but rather had taken "unnecessary risks" in driving too close to the car in front. "The way in which you were driving caused irreversible and heartbreaking changes to the lives of a number of those people," she said. She said no-one could fail to be touched by the eloquent and powerful statements of Ms Robert and her partner about the loss of their baby girl. "Slowly, they have recovered from their physical injuries. It will take much longer for their emotional healing," she said. In sentencing Thind, Judge Sexton told the court she accepted his remorse, but said it was lessened by his decision to flee the scene after he saw the collision. "I must state clearly that conduct of the kind you engaged in will not be tolerated," she said. Thind pleaded guilty to five counts of dangerous driving causing serious injury and failing to stop at the scene of an accident. He will serve a non-parole period of two years and three months. He has been ordered to pay $6,523 for damage to Ms Robert's car, and is likely to face deportation after his release from prison.

This is a very sad case...

Clearly, the accident happened in a short timeframe and there is no evidence whatsoever that the offender was aware of the woman's pregnancy - he didn't hit her vehicle directly and she was simply one of several people in the vicinity of his vehicle at the time that he was driving dangerously...

It is a fact, that the unborn baby died following the crash - but the manner of the offender's driving was apparently not so reckless as to legally warrant more serious charges...

It is interesting, the way that the journalist reported that the offender was deemed responsible for compensating for the damage to the woman's car...

I drive an average of nearly 100km each day and I find myself bearing witness to this sort of risky driving behaviour pretty much on a daily basis - but, despite the ever-present risk, I rarely witness a collision as a consequence...

As sad as this case is, I believe that the Judge had no real legal basis for imposing a harsher penalty than incarceration for a minimum non-parole period of 2 years and 3 months - if she had been harsher, her sentence would have most likely been overturned on appeal...

gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 17^th, 2010 at 1:36pm:

Annie Anthrax wrote on Nov 17th, 2010 at 10:18am: Wesley, what about mental illness in the mother? Or extreme poverty? Consensual incest that has resulted in a pregnancy? Buzz, do you really think the baby had no right to life because it's parents were gay? That's a pretty revolting point of view. No annie, I think buzz was arguing that OTHER posters have stated that the child shouldn't have been born, because the parents were gay...

I don't think they are even gay.

... wrote on Nov 17^th, 2010 at 2:25pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 17th, 2010 at 1:36pm: Annie Anthrax wrote on Nov 17th, 2010 at 10:18am: Wesley, what about mental illness in the mother? Or extreme poverty? Consensual incest that has resulted in a pregnancy? Buzz, do you really think the baby had no right to life because it's parents were gay? That's a pretty revolting point of view. No annie, I think buzz was arguing that OTHER posters have stated that the child shouldn't have been born, because the parents were gay... I don't think they are even gay.

You mean the two women mentioned in the story???

gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 17^th, 2010 at 2:48pm:

... wrote on Nov 17th, 2010 at 2:25pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 17th, 2010 at 1:36pm: Annie Anthrax wrote on Nov 17th, 2010 at 10:18am: Wesley, what about mental illness in the mother? Or extreme poverty? Consensual incest that has resulted in a pregnancy? Buzz, do you really think the baby had no right to life because it's parents were gay? That's a pretty revolting point of view. No annie, I think buzz was arguing that OTHER posters have stated that the child shouldn't have been born, because the parents were gay... I don't think they are even gay. You mean the two women mentioned in the story???

Oh silly me....fancy assuming her 'partner' with whom she had a baby was a man.  I don't know what came over me!

... wrote on Nov 17^th, 2010 at 2:25pm:

I don't think they are even gay.

ROAD rage has been blamed for the death of an unborn girl and destroying the dream of a woman who battled to have a baby.

The mother says her de facto wife and two stepdaughters are slowly dealing with the pain allegedly caused by an Indian driver pursuing a man who made an obscene hand gesture.

"My de facto wife and I lost our little girl . . . I don't want our family to be invisible (but) we have enough pain and injuries to deal with," she said.

The 33-year-old woman said she had tried for four years to conceive through an assisted pregnancy program.

"My de facto wife (I can't call her my wife because in this country we cannot marry) and I had spent nearly four years getting to know our sperm donor, undertaking tests and trying to get me pregnant using assisted conception


http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/mums-pain-as-road-rage-blamed-for-crash/story-e6frf7jo-1225817155287

Equitist wrote on Nov 17^th, 2010 at 2:05pm:

Quote: A Noble Park man, whose dangerous driving caused the death of an unborn baby, has been sentenced to three years and five months in jail. Judge Meryl Sexton told the court Amrick Thind, 23, was driving aggressively, weaving in and out of traffic along Warrigal Road in Oakleigh, Victoria when he suddenly changed lanes, [highlight]clipping a four-wheel drive and sending it veering head on into Hannah Robert's car[/highlight]. Ms Robert was eight months pregnant and lost her unborn baby daughter in the crash. Four other people were also injured. Judge Sexton said she did not accept Thind had made a "split second" decision to change lanes, but rather had taken "unnecessary risks" in driving too close to the car in front. "The way in which you were driving caused irreversible and heartbreaking changes to the lives of a number of those people," she said. She said no-one could fail to be touched by the eloquent and powerful statements of Ms Robert and her partner about the loss of their baby girl. "Slowly, they have recovered from their physical injuries. It will take much longer for their emotional healing," she said. In sentencing Thind, Judge Sexton told the court she accepted his remorse, but said it was lessened by his decision to flee the scene after he saw the collision. "I must state clearly that conduct of the kind you engaged in will not be tolerated," she said. Thind pleaded guilty to five counts of dangerous driving causing serious injury and failing to stop at the scene of an accident. He will serve a non-parole period of two years and three months. He has been ordered to pay $6,523 for damage to Ms Robert's car, and is likely to face deportation after his release from prison. This is a very sad case... Clearly, the accident happened in a short timeframe and there is no evidence whatsoever that the offender was aware of the woman's pregnancy - he didn't hit her vehicle directly and she was simply one of several people in the vicinity of his vehicle at the time that he was driving dangerously... It is a fact, that the unborn baby died following the crash - but the manner of the offender's driving was apparently not so reckless as to legally warrant more serious charges... It is interesting, the way that the journalist reported that the offender was deemed responsible for compensating for the damage to the woman's car... I drive an average of nearly 100km each day and I find myself bearing witness to this sort of risky driving behaviour pretty much on a daily basis - but, despite the ever-present risk, I rarely witness a collision as a consequence... As sad as this case is, I believe that the Judge had no real legal basis for imposing a harsher penalty than incarceration for a minimum non-parole period of 2 years and 3 months - if she had been harsher, her sentence would have most likely been overturned on appeal...

Garbage, pure garbage.

When you break road rules and engage in risky and dangerous behaviour, should that behaviour lead to a serious accident one should be held accountable to the full extent of the law.

The offender doesnt need to be aware of the womans pregnancy.  That is irrelevant.  If a woman were to walk into a bar, lift a gun and fire it at an abusive husband and miss him killing someone else, should they get off.

Cars when handled in a dangerous manner are a weapon.

This persons illegal and irresponsible behaviour should never be excused.  His actions, DIRECTLY HIS OWN, lead to the death of an unborn baby.

Swing it whatever way you want Thy, but this bottom feeder killed someones behaviour because someone flipped them off.  This couples life is in tatters because this person was determined to break the rules to extract some pathetic revenge.

I cant believe you seen to almost condone his actions as if it werent his fault.

Just because you see people do the wrong thing and no one gets hurt doesnt excuse those when things do go pear shaped.

Quote:

If a woman were to walk into a bar, lift a gun and fire it at an abusive husband and miss him killing someone else, should they get off.

Funny you should say that.....the precedent has already been set.


Quote:

A woman convicted of fatally stabbing her 15-month-old daughter has walked free from a Perth court after a judge said she had suffered enough. Nicole Frances Bryan, 23, stabbed her daughter Chenelle with a long-bladed kitchen knife as she was cradled in the arms of her father, Geoffrey Miller, at their Dawesville home, south of Perth, in March last year. On Friday the Supreme Court was told the pair had a four-year history of domestic disputes in which Miller had been violent towards Bryan, but she seldom notified police and would not heed advice to lodge an official complaint against her de facto husband. She told police she had targeted Miller in the attack and accidentally stabbed her daughter. http://www.watoday.com.au/wa-news/mother-escapes-jail-after-stabbing-baby-daughter-to-death-20100122-mpqe.html

... wrote on Nov 17^th, 2010 at 3:10pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 17th, 2010 at 2:48pm: ... wrote on Nov 17th, 2010 at 2:25pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 17th, 2010 at 1:36pm: Annie Anthrax wrote on Nov 17th, 2010 at 10:18am: Wesley, what about mental illness in the mother? Or extreme poverty? Consensual incest that has resulted in a pregnancy? Buzz, do you really think the baby had no right to life because it's parents were gay? That's a pretty revolting point of view. No annie, I think buzz was arguing that OTHER posters have stated that the child shouldn't have been born, because the parents were gay... I don't think they are even gay. You mean the two women mentioned in the story??? Oh silly me....fancy assuming her 'partner' with whom she had a baby was a man.  I don't know what came over me!

Well it WAS mentioned in a post in the thread....

gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 17^th, 2010 at 4:00pm:

... wrote on Nov 17th, 2010 at 3:10pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 17th, 2010 at 2:48pm: ... wrote on Nov 17th, 2010 at 2:25pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 17th, 2010 at 1:36pm: Annie Anthrax wrote on Nov 17th, 2010 at 10:18am: Wesley, what about mental illness in the mother? Or extreme poverty? Consensual incest that has resulted in a pregnancy? Buzz, do you really think the baby had no right to life because it's parents were gay? That's a pretty revolting point of view. No annie, I think buzz was arguing that OTHER posters have stated that the child shouldn't have been born, because the parents were gay... I don't think they are even gay. You mean the two women mentioned in the story??? Oh silly me....fancy assuming her 'partner' with whom she had a baby was a man.  I don't know what came over me! Well it WAS mentioned in a post in the thread....

Yes, one of BUZZ'S posts.  There's never anything useful in those, so I just skip over them.

... wrote on Nov 17^th, 2010 at 4:02pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 17th, 2010 at 4:00pm: ... wrote on Nov 17th, 2010 at 3:10pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 17th, 2010 at 2:48pm: ... wrote on Nov 17th, 2010 at 2:25pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 17th, 2010 at 1:36pm: Annie Anthrax wrote on Nov 17th, 2010 at 10:18am: Wesley, what about mental illness in the mother? Or extreme poverty? Consensual incest that has resulted in a pregnancy? Buzz, do you really think the baby had no right to life because it's parents were gay? That's a pretty revolting point of view. No annie, I think buzz was arguing that OTHER posters have stated that the child shouldn't have been born, because the parents were gay... I don't think they are even gay. You mean the two women mentioned in the story??? Oh silly me....fancy assuming her 'partner' with whom she had a baby was a man.  I don't know what came over me! Well it WAS mentioned in a post in the thread.... Yes, one of BUZZ'S posts.  There's never anything useful in those, so I just skip over them.

well I have to say, nothing YOU posted is actually changed by the fact that it was a 'gay' couple, as opposed to a hetero couple....

The complaint about the sentence is irrelevant to the gender of the parents....

gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 17^th, 2010 at 4:06pm:

... wrote on Nov 17th, 2010 at 4:02pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 17th, 2010 at 4:00pm: ... wrote on Nov 17th, 2010 at 3:10pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 17th, 2010 at 2:48pm: ... wrote on Nov 17th, 2010 at 2:25pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 17th, 2010 at 1:36pm: Annie Anthrax wrote on Nov 17th, 2010 at 10:18am: Wesley, what about mental illness in the mother? Or extreme poverty? Consensual incest that has resulted in a pregnancy? Buzz, do you really think the baby had no right to life because it's parents were gay? That's a pretty revolting point of view. No annie, I think buzz was arguing that OTHER posters have stated that the child shouldn't have been born, because the parents were gay... I don't think they are even gay. You mean the two women mentioned in the story??? Oh silly me....fancy assuming her 'partner' with whom she had a baby was a man.  I don't know what came over me! Well it WAS mentioned in a post in the thread.... Yes, one of BUZZ'S posts.  There's never anything useful in those, so I just skip over them. well I have to say, nothing YOU posted is actually changed by the fact that it was a 'gay' couple, as opposed to a hetero couple.... The complaint about the sentence is irrelevant to the gender of the parents....

No, I never made an issue of their sexuality.

While I don't think IVF should have been made available to them in the first place, it WAS made available, and a life was created because of it.

... wrote on Nov 17^th, 2010 at 3:53pm:

Quote: If a woman were to walk into a bar, lift a gun and fire it at an abusive husband and miss him killing someone else, should they get off. Funny you should say that.....the precedent has already been set. [quote] A woman convicted of fatally stabbing her 15-month-old daughter has walked free from a Perth court after a judge said she had suffered enough. Nicole Frances Bryan, 23, stabbed her daughter Chenelle with a long-bladed kitchen knife as she was cradled in the arms of her father, Geoffrey Miller, at their Dawesville home, south of Perth, in March last year. On Friday the Supreme Court was told the pair had a four-year history of domestic disputes in which Miller had been violent towards Bryan, but she seldom notified police and would not heed advice to lodge an official complaint against her de facto husband. She told police she had targeted Miller in the attack and accidentally stabbed her daughter. http://www.watoday.com.au/wa-news/mother-escapes-jail-after-stabbing-baby-daughter-to-death-20100122-mpqe.html

[/quote]

I remember that, and it too made my blood boil.

Soft Judges.  Why do people put so much pressure on police when Judges let people walk free anyway.

Verge wrote on Nov 17^th, 2010 at 3:46pm:

Equitist wrote on Nov 17th, 2010 at 2:05pm: Quote: A Noble Park man, whose dangerous driving caused the death of an unborn baby, has been sentenced to three years and five months in jail. Judge Meryl Sexton told the court Amrick Thind, 23, was driving aggressively, weaving in and out of traffic along Warrigal Road in Oakleigh, Victoria when he suddenly changed lanes, [highlight]clipping a four-wheel drive and sending it veering head on into Hannah Robert's car[/highlight]. Ms Robert was eight months pregnant and lost her unborn baby daughter in the crash. Four other people were also injured. Judge Sexton said she did not accept Thind had made a "split second" decision to change lanes, but rather had taken "unnecessary risks" in driving too close to the car in front. "The way in which you were driving caused irreversible and heartbreaking changes to the lives of a number of those people," she said. She said no-one could fail to be touched by the eloquent and powerful statements of Ms Robert and her partner about the loss of their baby girl. "Slowly, they have recovered from their physical injuries. It will take much longer for their emotional healing," she said. In sentencing Thind, Judge Sexton told the court she accepted his remorse, but said it was lessened by his decision to flee the scene after he saw the collision. "I must state clearly that conduct of the kind you engaged in will not be tolerated," she said. Thind pleaded guilty to five counts of dangerous driving causing serious injury and failing to stop at the scene of an accident. He will serve a non-parole period of two years and three months. He has been ordered to pay $6,523 for damage to Ms Robert's car, and is likely to face deportation after his release from prison. This is a very sad case... Clearly, the accident happened in a short timeframe and there is no evidence whatsoever that the offender was aware of the woman's pregnancy - he didn't hit her vehicle directly and she was simply one of several people in the vicinity of his vehicle at the time that he was driving dangerously... It is a fact, that the unborn baby died following the crash - but the manner of the offender's driving was apparently not so reckless as to legally warrant more serious charges... It is interesting, the way that the journalist reported that the offender was deemed responsible for compensating for the damage to the woman's car... I drive an average of nearly 100km each day and I find myself bearing witness to this sort of risky driving behaviour pretty much on a daily basis - but, despite the ever-present risk, I rarely witness a collision as a consequence... As sad as this case is, I believe that the Judge had no real legal basis for imposing a harsher penalty than incarceration for a minimum non-parole period of 2 years and 3 months - if she had been harsher, her sentence would have most likely been overturned on appeal... Garbage, pure garbage. When you break road rules and engage in risky and dangerous behaviour, should that behaviour lead to a serious accident one should be held accountable to the full extent of the law.

As was the case, in this example
A foetus is NOT considered a human life under the laws of this country - like it or not

Hence, there was no charge of manslaughter
Only dangerous (or culpable ?) driving causing injury

I'd guess it was a maximum sentence on that charge

That is all a magistrate can do