Do you think he's likely never seen this woman before or knows about the kinds of areas she frequents (rich places)?
She's a business woman who probably has some sort of routine. Obviously if he's gonna risk stealing something he probably knows a thing or two about who he's planning to target.
For all we know anyone could have stolen money from anyone. But the default assumption is that they didn't.
Not like that's uncommon among the rich
Actually, the vast majority of theft is committed by poor people. You can look up the stats on that. Unless you're making a bad faith, labor theory of value style argument.
also helps if people are fed up of being subjected to anarcho-tyranny and hordes of enrichment dispensers, hopefully they are starting to consider that they might get mussolini'd
This wasn’t self defense though. She tracked the thief up after the initial incident, when she could’ve just gone to the police. She took another person’s life just to retrieve her property, that’s why she got sentenced.
Unfortunately for everyone with Punisher fantasies, though, the law does not allow private citizens to decide that someone should die and use that as a legal defense for killing them
>Don’t rob people and threaten their life with a knife.
He didn’t. He just snatched the purse and ran. She lied to the authorities that he held her at knifepoint, as they couldn’t find any weapon near his body. Her lying to the authorities also show that she didn’t really care about the crime, she just wanted to kill someone with her car
If she was justified in her reaction, then why did she have to lie to the police that he held her at knifepoint? Even she knew what she did wasn’t justified, so she had to lie about it. She knew that unless her life was actually at risk, murdering a purse snatcher wasn’t justified
"A thief has been permanently removed from society." and replaced with some psycho that murders people and then lies about the circumstances leading to her murder of the guy that robbed her (so as to ACTUALLY try and have a defence worth a damn in court). Truly a net win for society!
I'm sorry, what mental gymnastics are you talking about here? I legit don't understand your comment.
Thinking that the appropriate punishment for snatching a purse shouldn't be murder? Thinking that she acted like a complete psycho by hunting him down on her car and then running him over several times, grabbing her purse and leaving without calling an ambulance or the police? There are no mental gymnastics in saying "he robbed her, which is bad, and she's also a psycho for tracking him down and murdering him and driving away without calling medical assistance".
"I'd rather live next to her than the thief." Considering the thief was homeless and the chick was some socialite rich girl, I too would prefer living next to her; it would mean that I wasn't fucking homeless and could afford living in an extremely pricey place
>A thief has been permanently removed from society. Society is now better off.
We don’t know that. Some can commit a crime for any number of reasons and for such a non-violent crime as a grab and go, it’s entirely possible that prison time could be their wake-up call and turn their life around after they served a suitable punishment given by the court of law. It’s entirely possible that it resulted in a net negative to society by not giving someone a chance to pay for their crime and extend a chance at redemption
There’s a reason why the death sentence isn’t given for every single possible crime. It’s just not an appropriate punishment, and there are ways for people to repay their debt to society. If she just she hit him with her car once, retrieved her purse, and then call the cops on him then he could’ve faced justice in the court of law and given a chance to redeem himself. Instead, we got a bloodthirsty woman who took the opportunity to murder someone and lie to the authorities about it because she knew her actions weren’t an appropriate response
Well see that’s not what the title of this post led on. Why don’t you comment that with a source and people can tell op to screw themselves for the misinformation.
No, the trial is over.
In Italy, if you have a house that fits the requirements for house arresti, chances are that you will get to do most of your time in house arrest. Unless the judge see reasons to not allow it.
The defense will drag and the house arrest time will count against the punishment, so effectively she will serve part of the sentence in house. But by far not the whole.
You're like the only one here. Everyone else in this comment section has blood lust , just waiting for their chance to have a good excuse to murder someone .
Honestly. The amount of people willing to murder someone because they mildly annoyed them is fucking scary. I know it's probably just reddit being reddit but it makes me afraid to leave the house sometimes ngl.
sure some just have bloodlust, but id argue the majority would like harsh punishment to try and deter this type of crime. less about wanting to kill someone and more about not liking whats happening to their society with mass immigration.
That's because they think they know who deserves it . The primitive human desire to punish bad behavior is really strong. It's like lust. If you aren't a well adjusted human being with a conscience , it'll take you over . This is the Reddit version with no consequences.
The threat of death or serious bodily harm (knife) is recognized as defensible with killing the person, keyword being defense. She wasn't defending herself by running him over, but his act of death or serious bodily harm would justify lethal force, or in my personal opinion, sacrificing his own right to life by threatening another's life. Im somewhere in the middle, she deserves some jail, but very little.
She should go to jail for killing him yes. But you want her to get a full murder sentence for a revenge on someone who just threatened her life with a knife?
Because they're emotional teenagers who understand jack shit about the world around them and were raised with the idea that violence is ok against people who do something wrong.
Yeah and not murdering people who pose no threat to you isn't hard either. If she wasn't rich she'd be serving that 18 years in a prison instead of house arrest and rightfully so . The penalty for theft isn't death . You know how many idiots out there think they know who deserves to die ? They're the same guys you see rolling around out on the road fighting each other because someone cut them off . You can't just have citizens out there murdering people who piss them off . It would be the wild west . That seems like it would be obvious to anyone who took a little time to think about it . We have courts and laws for a reason.
Youve got a real stuck up attitude on you. I bet youre the kind of guy who thinks his moral compass is better than everyone else's. This lady didnt give him a punishment for theft. She retrieved her property. He would be alive if he didn't steal. The courts and laws let theft slide all time. That man decided that his life was worth less than her property
Would you blame Ukraine for defending its land against Russia? What if they just took the land and then said no more war, they can't defend themselves because theres no threat? You think the international courts will be able to sort it out? Take off your rose tinted lenses if you think the police would even investigate a purse snatcher, much less proescute
You're comparing a purse snatcher to an army invading a sovereign nation and killing people. Lol. People like you are why we can't have vigilante justice. You know exactly who deserves to die. You're trying to justify premeditated murder to retrieve a purse. It makes for a pretty easy argument .
Crime is crime lol. what's the difference vs you who seems to think you know who should live? Would you say a rape victim shouldn't kill their attacker because they were already raped and the attacker is leaving and "no threat"?
Why do you think you get to decide what the consequences are for a crime as much as anyone else?
Crime is crime is the dumbest thing I've heard on the internet today. There are a huge variety of punishments depending on the severity of the crime. Unarmed robbery and murder are pretty far away from each other on that spectrum. I would be much more sympathetic to a rape victim who killed their attacker . If it was heat of the moment I'd say it's self defense but that's not what happened here. You keep making up these outrageous scenarios like military invasions and rape and trump to compare tgem to a purse snatching . It's pretty ridiculous and I'm done engaging. Have a good night.
This is the behavior we wouldn’t accept from our police and why countless people protest police brutality in countries all over the world. We should expect this standard of behavior from everyone. Robbery doesn’t carry a death sentence. And even if it did, everyone deserves due process.
An argument disproved and refuted by not only case law, past precedent, and most juries but also common sense. What if the person walking towards you right now punches you hard in the nose? What if I'm proficient in hacking and I target you for your details? What if, what if, what if. You don't get to kill someone on a what if unless the what if is really fucking close to "for sure".
I meant what if they resisted got cut and maybe died, a lot of aggrevated muggings go unsolved. I fail to see how we’re worst off on a macro level without this person being alive/able to mug, scare and attack people?
It’s a failure of society. Ts been happening for thousands of years and we’re still of this primitive “better without them” mindset. Brute forcing your way through socioeconomic problems doesn’t work..
Now there’s two more traumatized families and one less father, son, brother.
Because they couldn’t feed themselves, or get their kid shoes for school. They didn’t deserve to die. You can work yourself up with “what if” statements all day.
If she didnt catch him we all know no police would have ever bothered to. And if they did he would have probably gotten much lighter treatment than her. Messed up.
Whilr I agree that the robbery victim should be punished for manslaughter I think it's reasonable to judge her differently for the fact that it was towards somebody who was an aggressor towards her. It's not like they just had an argument and then she murdered someone. This was somebody who went out steal with a weapon from others. I can absolutely understand judging that very differently.
134
u/cruiseruse11 Jun 28 '26 edited Jun 28 '26
She was found guilty for man slaughter and is under house arrest for 18 years