"As in sports, the crime shouldn't be judged by the result but the intent. Bet you don't agree with that Nicky :-)"
Disco, I'll tell you why I don't agree with this and why sports and law are separate.
A On a certain night in the cross, a person king hits another person in an unprovoked attack. The victim suffers nothing but a concussion but still fills in a police report and catches a cab home.
B On the same night in the cross, a person king hits another person in an unprovoked attack and kills the victim.
Now, I am all for punishing A as harshly as possible. BUT, does he deserve the same punishment as B?
Personally, I think you are going into a real grey area by not taking into account the result. If both people had intent, how do you know if A's force of punch was exactly the same as B's and thus as you say, should be treated equally, regardless of the result.
I'm 100% sure you wouldn't want to see both A and B both serving 20 years in prison nor would the public want A and B both serving 1 year in prison as they both shared equal intent.
Kieran Loverage should have received 14 years for killing Thomas Kelly and I don't think people would think it was unfair for him receiving an extra 1 year for each of the other assaults on the night.
I don't think many would argue with that OR should Loverage receive and extra 14 years for each of the other attacks, which would be in accordance with your view. (total of around 70 years).
