[Lord-Voldemort]

• Murder of a child.
• Murder of two or more persons.
• Murder of one person with no aggravating circumstances (so a 'normal' murder).
• Manslaughter.
• GBH but with life-changing effects (such as acid throwing, burning, eye-gauging).
• GBH involving general wounding.
• Common assault (so slapping or punching someone).

Note: Work on the assumption that this is sentencing, so the defendant has been found guilty by a jury or pleaded guilty. Yes, facts differ on a case-by-case basis, but just try to provide a general opinion on what you believe the sentences should be (can include anything from imprisonment to execution or corporal punishment).

[Dorito]

Dunno about the others but all murders should carry a life sentence in my opinion.

And life should mean life.

[MattyJo]

The first three should definitely be life sentences in my eyes. The last three I couldn't really pass judgement as they can be very grey areas.

[hasan4life]

(Original post by Dorito)
Dunno about the others but all murders should carry a life sentence in my opinion.

And life should mean life.

pretty much this.

[The Patriot]

(Original post by Lord-Voldemort)
Murder of a child.

On a basic level, the same as murder of an adult, life imprisonment (in my view 40 years as a base). However, vulnerability factors should be taken into account by the jury i.e if the child is very young, so young that from the outset they couldn't defend themselves, then a sentence should be lengthened (understand that my 'life imprisonment' is not one of being locked-up until you die no matter how long that is).

(Original post by Lord-Voldemort)
Murder of two or more persons.

If they were part of the same act, then life imprisonment. If they're two separate murders, i.e a killing spree, then I would have them in prison for the rest of their lives but with psychiatric treatment, to see if they could be helped in any way.

(Original post by Lord-Voldemort)
Murder of one person with no aggravating circumstances (so a 'normal' murder).

40 years with psychiatric treatment.

(Original post by Lord-Voldemort)
Manslaughter.

Gross-Negligence Manslaughter should have a low sentence i.e 5-10 years depending on severity. i.e a complete apathy is aggravating, but a misunderstanding reduces it.

(Original post by Lord-Voldemort)
GBH but with life-changing effects (such as acid throwing, burning, eye-gauging).

15 years in prison and psychiatric treatment.

(Original post by Lord-Voldemort)
GBH involving general wounding.

5 years in prison.

(Original post by Lord-Voldemort)
Common assault (so slapping or punching someone).

No prison sentence unless it's a repeat offence.

Repeat offence = 6 months in prison.
First offence = warnings, fines and psychiatric treatment if appropriate.

[Introvert2020]

Impossible to say without a scenario to go with it, especially with regards to issues like manslaughter.

Murder though - I agree with the above poster. If it's premeditated it should probably mean life, barring occasional mitigating circumstances.

[Lord-Voldemort]

(Original post by The Patriot)
x

Why do you include psychiatric treatment in most of your sentences when the defendant might not be suffering any mental disorder?

[The Patriot]

(Original post by Lord-Voldemort)
Why do you include psychiatric treatment in most of your sentences when the defendant might not be suffering any mental disorder?

Psychiatric treatment can function on many levels, from deeply intrusive for those with deep, psychological issues such as schizophrenia, or less intrusive for things like social anxiety.

For a human being to be so warped as to snap and attack or kill another human being, then there must be something wrong. Think about it for a minute: nobody commits that kind of atrocious crime without a significant psychological trait we would find to be undesirable. For example in the Staffordshire prison survey 85% of prisoners had ADHD. Clearly then, most criminals don't make themselves.

For me, there is no function, beyond the protection of others, of sending someone to prison. We must try and help people. Sticking someone behind a wall doesn't help, and neither does killing them. Most criminals re-offend, because nothing has changed for them. We need to change criminals, and some sort of psychiatric treatment is the way to do that.

[Annoying-Mouse]

Murder of; child, two or more persons and one person with no aggravating circumstances = Execution

GBH but with life-changing effects (such as acid throwing, burning, eye-gauging) = 15 years

GBH involving general wounding = 10 years

Common assault (so slapping or punching someone) = 2 years

This is mean being guided by my emotions, by the way. Realistically, I'm not going to presume I know better than a judge who has studied criminal law longer than I've been alive thus have no problem with current sentencing.

[Tom_Hagen]

I think criminals being able to roam about freely would be good for law and order. Except for the child murderers, who I'd execute.

[Redheaded_Dancer]

I think any and all murder irrespective of the reasoning should be life, and I mean life, not twenty five years minimum service and potentially being let out again. The only possible exception is if the person did this under duress, ie, if they didn't kill the person they themselves would have been killed or other situations like this, in cases where it's under duress it should be 25 years minimum.
Common assault? This isn't very serious at all, so either a very short stay in prison (30 days or less) or community service depending on the severity of the common assault.
GBH depending on the severity should be at least 3 years and GBH with life changing effects at least 5 years.
Obviously in courts sentences vary due to the circumstances when the crime was committed, the reasons for the crime-if any-, severity of the crime and other things such as the mental state of the accused, so nothing is a definite solid time frame although there are suggested guidelines.