I don't often read "Letters To The Editor" because it seems just the nuts submit them. But there was one that I read about 6 weeks ago. The writer was expressing his outrage at what he thought was an unjustly lenient sentence handed down to a young man who killed a person while driving drunk.
I don't remember the exact particulars of the sentence but it was something like 3 months. He brought up the case of a woman in Penticton that was convicted of embezzling her employer out of a large amount of money and was sentenced to two years in prison.
His outrage stemmed for the fact that killing someone netted a much more lenient sentence than cooking the company books.
There is often a knee jerk reaction to court sentences, most people seem to think sentences are too light and justice is not accomplished. I think you have to be there and hear the evidence before you can judge on a judgement.
In this particular case, the writer seemed to have passed over his Law 11 class which dealt with INTENT. It makes a huge difference when considering sentencing. You know that young man who drank too much had no intention of killing someone even if he knew he had consumed too much alcohol and should not be driving.
On the other hand the embezzler went to work every day over a considerable time with full intent to commit a crime. She had plenty of opportunity to consider her actions, knew they were wrong but continued to commit the crime on a daily basis.
I believe the sentencing was fair.
When I was a young man, well even into my 30's I often drove while intoxicated. Sometimes so much so that I wondered how I got home. Thankfully I never was involved in an accident. More due to luck than anything else. And I think many if not all of us could say the same thing. This unlucky man and his even unluckier victim were both victims of "shit happens". It could have happened to any of us. Of course he was wrong to drive while drunk and he'll live with the results of doing so throughout his life.
