mfm04622:


Is there punishment in Nigerian law for involuntary manslaughter? There is. Was so tried in a competent court of law? Yes. Was she found guilty? Yes. Was she sentenced? Yes, to 5 years OR a fine of 100,0000. There is no fine for manslaughter in Nigerian law! So the State Govt appealed against the fine. Now she has been ordered to serve her time. What is wrong in the State appealing against unlawful order by the trial court? Let her serve her punishment for manslaughter as envisaged by the court. Simple

Eruditor:


I said she committed a crime. I agreed she did. But not all crimes are the same. Her punishment should be worthy of the crime not over it. 5 years after so many years is harsh. A fine is the only thing that can make a difference.

prestige2013:



That is why we have more CRIME when fine is been seen as the punishment. I dont know the yardstick for the 5 years imprisonment but I support her imprisonment so other well do men can learn.

Eruditor:


Emotive trash.

You even called the deceased "Innocent". What is to say he wasn't on his way to kill a debtor or that he would not have an accident that would have taken someone else's life say 2 months after that day?

Did Ibinabo set out on that very day to kill him?

So his family lost a breadwinner, a brother, father, one who gave 7 years of his life to becoming a doctor, but her family won't lose anybody when she goes to jail? Her husband won't lose a wife? Her kids won't lose a mum?

I thought you were saying what is sauce for the Goose is sauce for the Gander? Why the glaring hypocrisy?

The only thing that can be determined as justice will be what the law has to say about involuntary manslaughter. If the option of a fine was available and the first court issued that, then there is no need for the emotional hot air you are spewing.

She is guilty of the crime, but should not be a reckless victim of judicial eye-service and pandering.

Eruditor:


You never had one to begin with. Congratulations.

gboss4sure:


Are you guys not ashamed of bringing IPOB into issues that have nothing to do with them?

Why is IPOB giving people like you headache?

Eruditor:


I would have been surprised if a sentence depicting any form of intelligence made its way into your post.

Eruditor:


Emotive trash.

You even called the deceased "Innocent". What is to say he wasn't on his way to kill a debtor or that he would not have an accident that would have taken someone else's life say 2 months after that day?

Did Ibinabo set out on that very day to kill him?

So his family lost a breadwinner, a brother, father, one who gave 7 years of his life to becoming a doctor, but her family won't lose anybody when she goes to jail? Her husband won't lose a wife? Her kids won't lose a mum?

I thought you were saying what is sauce for the Goose is sauce for the Gander? Why the glaring hypocrisy?

The only thing that can be determined as justice will be what the law has to say about involuntary manslaughter. If the option of a fine was available and the first court issued that, then there is no need for the emotional hot air you are spewing.

She is guilty of the crime, but should not be a reckless victim of judicial eye-service and pandering.

Eruditor:


I think you are getting things conflated. Rapists and murderers don't commit their crimes by happenstance, that's why they are charged under the provisions of first degree murder or rape cases. In her case, she committed involuntary manslaughter. She did not set out to have him killed, her negligence and carelessness caused his death.

Should the law take it's toll, sure, but not under emotive guises. That's my argument. Did she flee the scene? Did she blame the deceased? Did she protest her innocence? The answer to all these questions is NO.

Yet what you hear in the media space is that she wasn't acting remorseful because she posts pics of her daughter in the USA or that she attends functions and events? Does this make sense to you?

contactlenz:
[/b]


How would you feel if the incident had happened to your family's breadwinner? Let the law take its place, it is no respecter of anyone irrespective of one's status, position or class. You do the crime, you do the time[b]


How would you feel if the incident had happened to your family's breadwinner? Let the law take its place, it is no respecter of anyone irrespective of one's status, position or class. You do the crime, you do the time


How would you feel if the incident had happened to your family's breadwinner? Let the[b] law[/b] take its[b] course, [/b] it is no respecter of anyone irrespective of one's status, position or class. You do the crime, you do the time.

Eruditor:


I understand you, but I think the sentence is harsh. Brandy, the American singer, had the same issue and she didn't go to jail.

JayJohnson:


Not headache Son, IPOB is synonymous with evil!!!

Eruditor:


So if she goes to jail then what? My family's breadwinner now comes back or what?

Fanirandele:


She didn't kill him on purpose which is why she's getting 5yrs as opposed to what actual murderers get. At the end of the day her lack of responsibility led to the death of a man . The sentence is for manslaughter which is what she's been found guilty of , there is no emotions there. The law is not interested in if she attended parties or not, when found guilty of a crime there's usually a minimum and maximum sentence applicable depending on the crime. The judge decides based in that,I don't believe she's even been given the maximum sentence which shows they took things into consideration .

Fanirandele:


When murderers go to jail it does not bring the dead back, when rapists go to jail it does not reverse the rape. The point of law is to hold people responsible for their actions so 2mwr someone else will think twice before driving drunk. If there are no consequences everyone can as well go around driving drunk and killing people

Babalegba:
This is the kind of post that makes me think that many Nigerians should not be classified as homo sapiens

Eruditor:


Not all manslaughter cases are for 5 years. The law is not a mechanical tool that must turn in one direction. You can't just look at the impact it made to the victim's family. Her's has to be considered too.

And we wonder why people would rather hit and run than stay, own up to the crime and be sentenced for 5 years.

Eruditor:


So if she goes to jail then what? My family's breadwinner now comes back or what?

Eruditor:


The essence of giving murderers death or life sentences is the law's way of saying "since you deliberately took another man's life, we are deliberately taking yours". The law should always be interpreted by the spirit behind it and not mechanically.

Fanirandele:


Brandy was not drunk or at least they were not able to prove that but Ibinabo was proven to be drunk so it's different. If she had the accident while sober the sentencing would have been more lenient. The west is very strict on sentences for manslaughter while drunk driving

Fanirandele:


There is a range of sentencing for each crime and the judge will decides on sentencing based on the particulars of the case. It's the perpetrators choice to impact negatively on their family by their action unlike the victim. The judge listened to everything and made his judgement based on evidence. The were witnesses so she couldn't run away, people identified her.

By the way the law is more lenient on those who have accidents while not drinking. Drunk driving is a decision and not a mistake

Eruditor:


For people who have a habit of getting drunk (and it must be proved by the prosecution), yes. Apart from beer-parlour gossip we cannot ascertain that is the case with Ibinabo. Brandy was over speeding and I am very sure the American law frowns upon overspeeding that led to the death of someone else.

Eruditor:


Accidents that happen from drink-driving are accidents and not decisions. Pro causa, non causa.

Eruditor:


Emotive trash.

You even called the deceased "Innocent". What is to say he wasn't on his way to kill a debtor or that he would not have an accident that would have taken someone else's life say 2 months after that day?

Did Ibinabo set out on that very day to kill him?

So his family lost a breadwinner, a brother, father, one who gave 7 years of his life to becoming a doctor, but her family won't lose anybody when she goes to jail? Her husband won't lose a wife? Her kids won't lose a mum?

I thought you were saying what is sauce for the Goose is sauce for the Gander? Why the glaring hypocrisy?

The only thing that can be determined as justice will be what the law has to say about involuntary manslaughter. If the option of a fine was available and the first court issued that, then there is no need for the emotional hot air you are spewing.

She is guilty of the crime, but should not be a reckless victim of judicial eye-service and pandering.

Eruditor:


Emotive trash.

You even called the deceased "Innocent". What is to say he wasn't on his way to kill a debtor or that he would not have an accident that would have taken someone else's life say 2 months after that day?

Did Ibinabo set out on that very day to kill him?

So his family lost a breadwinner, a brother, father, one who gave 7 years of his life to becoming a doctor, but her family won't lose anybody when she goes to jail? Her husband won't lose a wife? Her kids won't lose a mum?

I thought you were saying what is sauce for the Goose is sauce for the Gander? Why the glaring hypocrisy?

The only thing that can be determined as justice will be what the law has to say about involuntary manslaughter. If the option of a fine was available and the first court issued that, then there is no need for the emotional hot air you are spewing.

She is guilty of the crime, but should not be a reckless victim of judicial eye-service and pandering.

Eruditor:


Emotive trash.

You even called the deceased "Innocent". What is to say he wasn't on his way to kill a debtor or that he would not have an accident that would have taken someone else's life say 2 months after that day?

Did Ibinabo set out on that very day to kill him?

So his family lost a breadwinner, a brother, father, one who gave 7 years of his life to becoming a doctor, but her family won't lose anybody when she goes to jail? Her husband won't lose a wife? Her kids won't lose a mum?

I thought you were saying what is sauce for the Goose is sauce for the Gander? Why the glaring hypocrisy?

The only thing that can be determined as justice will be what the law has to say about involuntary manslaughter. If the option of a fine was available and the first court issued that, then there is no need for the emotional hot air you are spewing.

She is guilty of the crime, but should not be a reckless victim of judicial eye-service and pandering.

Eruditor:


Not all manslaughter cases are for 5 years. The law is not a mechanical tool that must turn in one direction. You can't just look at the impact it made to the victim's family. Her's has to be considered too.

And we wonder why people would rather hit and run than stay, own up to the crime and be sentenced for 5 years.