Unbelievable

[anotheoldgit]

http://tinyurl.com/3xyzvqr

Words cannot describe these two, evil scum, savages, mentally deficient, sadistic, all fall into insignificance when describing them. It is only by a miracle that they escaped being called mass murderers.

Even though they had been drinking, how could they consider doing anything like this?

What about their sentence, yes far too short, they should have been given life, life of hard labour digging out railway cuttings by hand, day after day. Or perhaps putting them on a scrap train, knowing that at some time the train would run into a barricade such as they built, perhaps they wouldn't have been so lucky as those other passengers.

[Gromit]

Maybe they will get a little education while they are away.

[Answerprancer]

...yes, or bum-raped by Mr Big who's in with the wardens!

[Goodsoulette]

Stupid, stupid drunk kids. Would be interesting to hear how they felt about their actions now. I'm not entirely certain they had thought through their actions, they look like a pair of little tw@ts but I'm not convinced they set out to harm or kill a trainful of people. Idiots, I think 8 years would be quite a good deterrant to any others thinking of doing it though.

[Gromit]

here is a tough one.Who do we believe, the Taleban or the British?

http://www.independen...-to-iran-2026864.html

As a rule, I tend not to believe the enemy's propaganda. Pity other hang on to the Taleban's every boast.

[Gromit]

^ ^ ^ ^
Sorry wrong thread.

[hc4361]

They may be evil, scum, savages, mentally deficient, sadistic...but they are our evil, scum, savages, mentally deficient, sadistic...

[sara3]

they probably have a very low IQ. sad examples of "men".

[Roughquest]

Indeed, what a complete waste of space they are and they are both on Facebook ! Yobs, they should be hung then 2 less a-holes in the world.

[fredpuli47]

Attempted murder was neither easy nor necessary to prove.Attempted murder is harder to prove than murder, which is why they weren't charged with it. For murder an intent to cause grievous bodily harm is enough but for the attempt only an intent to kill suffices. Then why not a charge of attempting to cause gbh, which offence has a maximum sentence of life ? Perhaps because the CPS thought a jury might not agree what kind of injury the accused actually intended, as distinct from what they might or might not forsee as possible, but, be that as it may the offence with which they were actually charged ('endangering the safety of railway passengers' ) has a maximimum penalty of (guess what? ) LIFE imprisonment. 'Endangering the safety' covers any kind of harm or danger, not just serious injury, and niceties about intent to cause grievous harm or actual bodily harm don't fall to be considered for that offence.All that's required is that the accused did something intending to endanger 'safety'.

.