[Closed] Man jailed for killing best pal after drunken punch

At least they spared someone else from having an idiot friend for 45 years.

Punishment isn't up to the victims family. As it stands he'll serve what 8-14 months ? It's hard for me to feel sorry for him or that he's been hard done by. Why would you punch your best friend ?

He'd be alive if he'd been wearing a helmet.

Seriously? As I've managed 4 decades of adult life without needing to punch someone my sympathy is with the victim not the thug.

Interesting case. He swung a punch and the consequences were out of all expectation. He's guilty in the eyes of the law and gets jailed.

Make a careless manoeuvre in a car, the result is unexpectedly tragic, the driver rarely gets jailed.

🙁

No ive never punched a mate but I'm sure I've come close!

I have little sympathy, but I find it an interesting case

MoreCashThanDash

Interesting case. He swung a punch and the consequences were out of all expectation. He's guilty in the eyes of the law and gets jailed.

Make a careless manoeuvre in a car, the result is unexpectedly tragic, the driver rarely gets jailed.

The difference is intent. I'm not saying the sentence is appropirate but when you get in a car to go buy a can of fizzy pop it's not your intention to attack or harm anyone. When you punch someone in the face, it is.

Not a lot of detail in the article, perhaps both men escalated the situation, maybe the victim was goading him. Not victim blaming, just playing devils advocate since I don't have a lot to go on.

Guilty.

There is no excuse for accidental act of killing.

Then why do we have manslaughter?

Manslaughter isn't an excuse it just means they didn't plan to kill.

He will serve 14 months. Seems a fair sentence for punching someone really hard in the face, regardless of the final outcome.

Its a pretty tragic story however it could easily have been someone else, 14 months for killing someone seems very lenient if you ask me.

Why would you punch your best friend ?

The laws had its say and that's that. But why would you punch your best fiend ? Easy really, I once punched my brother so hard I broke a bone in my hand 🙁 It's not impossible to provoke almost anybody into throwing a punch, and no one on here has any idea of what led up to the incident.

It's so sad from top to bottom, this one. Really not sure what prison achieves. I'm not in the habit of hitting folk but it's such a matter of circumstance; how many punches get thrown in Liverpool every night, with intent to cause real harm, against friends, against strangers, but come to nothing because of luck.

Prison serves a purpose of keeping the public safe from a person who is prepared to punch a close friend in circumstances that led to the friends death. It's as simple as that.

Some interesting opinions (ie: misconceptions) on what the law is.

Hopefully this will help:

1) manslaughter is not simply a term for "killing someone accidentally". It has several different meanings.

2) put simply, murder occurs when the perpetrator kills the person and in doing so intended to kill that person or to cause them serious harm. So for example if you punch someone with the intention of breaking their nose, that's probably murder. If you aim a half arsed swing at someone in jest only intending to brush their ear, but you mis-judge it and end up killing them, that would be manslaughter. These examples are slightly crude, although relevant to this case, but they illustrate the point.

3) in this case the convicted person admitted manslaughter and was convicted of that offence. The CPS must have been convinced that there was no reasonable prospect of a conviction for murder.

A friend of mine was killed in similar circumstances when he had a scuffle with his brother over doing the washing up.

His brother was arrested and taken to the police headquarters miles away - the following day his family had to plead to get his brother out of custody so he could say goodbye before they turned his life support machine off.

I can see what people are saying but his brother has effectively got a life sentence hanging over him as he will never get over what he's done. I'm sure the guys best friend in the above case will be the same.I'm not sure what purpose a prison sentence will actually serve.

Serves him right. The law is the law. It's grey areas that mean that there is scope for arguing and thus too many people get away with trivial sentences. Manslaughter is all to often applied when down right lack of thinking has created a death.
I strongly believe that failure to think about avoidance is the same as thinking about doing something. So failure to slow down, even to a crawl, because you can see where you are driving into the sun is the same as choosing to drive blind and kill if there is someone in front of you.
Of course I would suspect that this was not planned but stupidity must be punished. If those affected by the death should have a say in the punishment then it must work both ways and sentences increased if so desired.

Yeah, it's a brave court that allows a man who punches somebody in the face, killing them, to walk free. That's not really the right precedent to set.

Drunken man kills another for no real reason? Jail is the only result.

I was a witness to a brawl in my teens in town. One guy got socked on the jaw; went down and never got up.

Oddly, my wife went to school with a lad who thumped someone, and they died. Different town/situation/victim.

I don't know why anyone thinks it won't or can't happen. If you'e swinging, you are intending to do harm.

14 months for killing someone seems very lenient if you ask me

Sounds about right to me. The damage was done by him stumbling backwards and clouting his head on the kerb - if the defendant had pushed him a jokey way, a verdict of manslaughter would seem a bit harsh, but this guy aimed a punch in anger and the severe consequences demand a custodial sentence.

fisha - Member

Prison serves a purpose of keeping the public safe from a person who is prepared to punch a close friend in circumstances that led to the friends death. It's as simple as that.

I'm sure he'll resume his killing spree as soon as he's out.

I strongly believe that failure to think about avoidance is the same as thinking about doing something.

That's absurd.

huckleberryfatt

It wasn't an accident - if it was he'd have lacked the necessary mens rea for manslaughter. If you deliberately punch someone in the face you mean to do some damage.

But it was an accident. The punch was intentional, the death was not. He intended to punch him, not to kill him. He didn't run over and kick his friend in the head repeatedly when he was down.

martinhutch - Member

Sounds about right to me. The damage was done by him stumbling backwards and clouting his head on the kerb - if the defendant had pushed him a jokey way, a verdict of manslaughter would seem a bit harsh, but this guy aimed a punch in anger and the severe consequences demand a custodial sentence.

So what if he had punched him, but instead of hitting his head he fell on some broken glass, got an infection and died a few months later - those would be severe consequences, would that demand a custodial sentence?

So what if he had punched him, but instead of hitting his head he fell on some broken glass, got an infection and died a few months later - those would be severe consequences, would that demand a custodial sentence?

Yes it would. The legally qualified can correct as necessary but the test for avoiding the charge would be a time greater than a year and a day between incident and death of the victim.

well the law seem have been trying to get people, particularly younger "it's weekend lets get pissed and have a punch up" folk to take the one punch kill thing seriously for a while, not so much [i]examples being made[/i] as pointing out how serious it is and you will get into a lot of trouble if you instigate one. I don't think "letting off" a guy just cos he's older and was chums with the deceased is a good example.

Throwing your fists around is a bad idea and can have very tragic consequences, jail can follow, don't do it - even if your team lose.

[i]But it was an accident. The punch was intentional, the death was not. [/i]

Hence manslaughter and a fairly light sentence for causing (albeit inadvertently) a death?

People get similar sentences for ABH/GBH.

I assume if the night had been going better and he'd stumbled over to his mate and given him a hug, they both fell over and the friend hit his head on the kerb causing his death then the legal outcome would have been very different. Both unintentional deaths caused by the same man but different factors at the start, I think those factors are important.

There have been so many threads on here complaining rightly about people who don't go out to cause a death but do so by being reckless to the possible consequences of their dangerous activity.

We should be applauding a court ruling which actually sends the message that the devastating consequences of your reckless actions do outweigh your lack of intent to cause them.

I'm sure he'll resume his killing spree as soon as he's out.

Anyone that free with their fists will no doubt have done it before; and no doubt will do it again.

Some people are just wired up like that.

ScottChegg

Anyone that free with their fists will no doubt have done it before;

Maybe they did that every weekend. Maybe he's never punched anyone in his life. An open handed slap can ko someone, never mind a drunken 60 year old. For all we know these two might have been paralytic. Unless you were on the jury I don't understand how you can claim he was "that free with his fists". Or is anyone who have ever thrown a punch "free with their fists" by definition?

and no doubt will do it again

So do you think he has the bodies of his other murder victims buried under his patio? All killed by cunningly placed pavement?

The damage was done by him stumbling backwards and clouting his head on the kerb - if the defendant had pushed him a jokey way, a verdict of manslaughter would seem a bit harsh, but this guy aimed a punch in anger and the severe consequences demand a custodial sentence.

The court would have had to decide which of the forms of manslaughter applied. Sentence would have depended on guidelines for each sort.

But likely that the court would still have found guilty of manslaughter.

[i] I strongly believe that failure to think about avoidance is the same as thinking about doing something.[/i]

That's absurd.

+1 this is a very well developed area of law, so [b]mattsccm[/b] is pretty out of step with a century or more of judicial thinking.

ScottChegg - Member

Anyone that free with their fists will no doubt have done it before; and no doubt will do it again.

Some people are just wired up like that.

Obviously you have access to a lot of information about the defendant that we don't.

The frailty of the victim, and the unexpected death following a deliberate assault does not mitigate the crime. I think the "eggshell skull rule" still applies, but IANAL...

The intent was to hurt. Anything other than conviction and prison would be victim blaming.

So do you think he has the bodies of his other murder victims buried under his patio? All killed by cunningly placed pavement?

Yep, that's exactly what I'm saying, Columbo.

In English law "you take your victim as you find them". You punch someone (with intent to kill them or to cause them serious harm), they have a heart problem, they have a heart-attack as a consequence of you punching them, they die. It's still murder, even if the average person without a heart condition would not have died as a result of the punch.

According to that link, he "never meant to hurt him." Is he unfamiliar with how punches to the face work?

Maybe they did that every weekend. Maybe he's never punched anyone in his life.

We're speculating, of course. We don't know either way.

However. I've been drunk many times, and I've had many squabbles with friends, but never has it even once in my life crossed my mind to punch one of my "closest friends" in the face. I can't begin to envisage a situation where I'd be compelled to do that.

And here we have a sixty year old bloke dressed in football colours punching a best friend hard enough to knock him to the ground over a "silly row"? I'll bet dollars to donuts that a) they were both pissed up and b) he's no stranger to a cheeky jab.

I could be wrong of course, but that's the only explanation that makes any sense to me.

However. I've been drunk many times, and I've had many squabbles with friends, but never has it even once in my life crossed my mind to punch one of my "closest friends" in the face. I can't begin to envisage a situation where I'd be compelled to do that.

Just because you haven't done it, or can't relate doesn't mean it's never happened. Or doesn't happen a lot.

And here we have a sixty year old bloke dressed in football colours punching a best friend hard enough to knock him to the ground over a "silly row"?

I have no idea what relevance football colours have (I hate soccer) but it doesn't necessarily take a lot of force to knock someone to the ground. And we're talking about a drunken pensioner here.

I'll bet dollars to donuts that a) they were both pissed up

I agree, which is why I wouldn't be surprised if it was a relatively innocuous looking blow that knocked the poor man down.

Just because you haven't done it, or can't relate doesn't mean it's never happened. Or doesn't happen a lot.

Sure, but my point was that you'd have to be a certain sort of person to do it.

I have no idea what relevance football colours have (I hate soccer)

So do I, I was just pandering to a lazy stereotype.

Cougar

Sure, but my point was that you'd have to be a certain sort of person to do it.

More speculation. And I can't agree. Sometimes a comment or criticism from a close friend or family member cuts more deeply. Throw in impaired judgement due to alcohol and you have a recipe for this kind of thing.

If he had a history of this type of thing would it not have come out during the trial?

I for one don't think that the sentence was long enough. He struck out at someone and they died as a result. Whatever his intentions, and I'm struggling to understand why you'd punch a friend in the face, the result was death.

He wasn't defending himself, he attacked someone.

For those arguing in his favourite, I assume you'd feel the same if it was one of your family who died?

zanelad

I assume you'd feel the same if it was one of your family who died?

Well there's no need for anyone here to speculate since the victim's family are in this exact situation and said they didn't want him jailed. Presumably they know more about the case than we do.

For those arguing in his favourite,

I think it's only myself and Northwind who've said anything favourable and for the record I'm just playing devils advocate since based on absolutely no information whatsoever the legal eagles of STW have concluded:

He's free with his fists.

Hit his friend really hard.

He has a history of violence.

Will commit violent acts in the future.

Conforms to a specific type of person (eugenics?) required to do this.

The victim's family are wrong to plead for a non custodial sentence.

I'm just not sure I see the benefit in locking him up.

zanelad - Member

For those arguing in his favourite, I assume you'd feel the same if it was one of your family who died?

I'd hope so. Certainly in this case, the family DO feel that way and I really admire them for that. It'd be so easy to hate, in these circumstances.

ScottChegg - Member

Anyone that free with their fists will no doubt have done it before; and no doubt will do it again.

In this case possibly not. Age 63, no previous convictions.

Richard Eveleigh is widely regarded as a non violent man who is well liked and well regarded.

Eveleigh is 63 and has no previous convictions.

Eveleigh was originally charged with murder which judge says was "completely unnecessary"

https://twitter.com/mrdaveguest?lang=en-gb

Sometimes a comment or criticism from a close friend or family member cuts more deeply.

Eveleigh is 63 and has no previous convictions.

[img] [/img]

That doesn't change the fact that punching someone because they annoy you is not reasonable and should become acceptable, and, more specifically, shouldn't have become as acceptable as it has...

Well there's no need for anyone here to speculate since the victim's family are in this exact situation and said they didn't want him jailed. Presumably they know more about the case than we do.

I wasn't speculating about the victim's family, unless they're subscribers to STW. I was referring to those on here. Does one family's viewpoint apply to all families?

We read about cyclists killed through the actions of motorists on here and the pack are baying for blood. They don't seem so tolerant and understanding when the perpetrator is behind the wheel of a car. Lash out at a long standing friend and it seems to be OK. Could happen to anyone. So could a moments inattention when driving, but that seems to be another ballgame.

Whatever your views, and your welcome to them as I am to mine I do not think that I would be happy if he killed a member of my family and was treated in what I consider a lenient manner.

I'd hope so. Certainly in this case, the family DO feel that way and I really admire them for that. It'd be so easy to hate, in these circumstances.

Let's hope you never have to put it to the test.

zanelad

I wasn't speculating about the victim's family, unless they're subscribers to STW. I was referring to those on here. Does one family's viewpoint apply to all families?

Each set of circumstances will be different. In this specific case the people affiliated with most of the facts are the family of the victim, and they didn't want him to go to jail.

I do not think that I would be happy if he killed a member of my family and was treated in what I consider a lenient manner.

Of course you wouldn't. He's nothing to you, you don't know him. Imagine instead that in a moment of drunken madness your best friend, brother or father took an ill advised swipe at you and then you stumbled, hit your head and died as a result. Would you want them to go to jail? If so for how long?

Imagine instead that in a moment of drunken madness your best friend, brother or father took an ill advised swipe at you and then you stumbled, hit your head and died as a result. Would you want them to go to jail?

Yes. He's killed you for nothing, over nothing.

Should he be guest of honour at the wake instead?

Why does 'drunken madness' excuse vicious behaviour? If he does that to a 'mate', what could he do to someone who, god forbid, spilled his pint?

Making a man who killed someone into a victim is a bit mixed up, in my view.

UKIP MEP:

[i]Sources tell Telegraph Woolfe is suffering from bleeding of the brain after he was punched. One witness said he fell into a window.[/i]

what should the sentence for the person who did it be?

Death by Hanging.

Just for being in UKIP