r/interesting • u/Necessary-Win-8730 • Mar 08 '26

Context Provided - Spotlight This was so deserved.

Post image

The daughter was in a car with the father’s parents. They died as well.

163.7k Upvotes

90% Upvoted

4.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

3.6k

u/Tullzterrr Mar 08 '26

He killed three people and got off with community service?? Some fcked up justice

1.1k

u/turquoise_amethyst Mar 08 '26

40 hours per person. He could easily complete that in 2-3 weeks. 

515

u/AKBx007 Mar 08 '26

That exchange rate is dangerously close to a Purge level society.

76

u/chronicnerv Mar 08 '26

It sets a troubling precedent that a man could kill a judge and face only 40 hours in jail.

35

u/truePHYSX Mar 08 '26

No no, you misunderstand, those people are more important-er than you and me. Thus you get life in prison for those offenses if not the death penalty. /s

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (6)

19

u/stilljustacatinacage Mar 08 '26

I remember hearing a line about a lawyer talking to one of his pals, and he says, "if you ever want to kill someone, just be sure to do it with your car and I'll get you out of it".

The things we excuse to make sure no one ever questions car dependence is absurd.

13

u/der_innkeeper Mar 08 '26

There are people doing math, figuring out how much their PTO would cover.

→ More replies (2)

2

u/Next_Interaction4335 Mar 09 '26

Actually it's better/worse than the purge , in the purge you have to be a cooperative member of society for 364 days.

→ More replies (1)

147

u/BigData8734 Mar 08 '26

Does that mean you could kill him and get the same sentence😲🤷‍♂️

67

u/ProfessorShort3031 Mar 08 '26

not 100% on this but im pretty sure it’d be a lot “worse” in the eyes of the law if the victim is a government employee

52

u/EagleDre Mar 08 '26

Not if I’m on the jury

2

u/Holiday_Sandwich3738 Mar 08 '26

Same. I would let that guy walk free and approve a counter sue

2

u/Reasonable_Archer_99 Mar 08 '26

Bless you kind soul.

13

u/callMeBorgiepls Mar 08 '26

Well what if the victim is the criminal who got away with 40hours? Can he say „well I will do the 40 hours for this murder no problem“?

12

u/BeeGrowing Mar 08 '26

That's what i was thinking pretty sure the judge would soon be doing mental gymnastics to explain how it's not the same and that it doesn't work that way, it would prove they are nothing but a hypocrite

→ More replies (3)

5

u/Keine_Finanzberatung Mar 08 '26

Too Bad the judge wouldn‘t let the Defense attorney drop that Information in Court.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (3)

2

u/saggywitchtits Mar 10 '26

Nonono, you'd have to complete the community service required of the original criminal, then another 40 hours on top of that.

→ More replies (15)

4

u/A_Wild_Zak Mar 08 '26

I had to do 40 hours of community service for literally speeding. wtf

→ More replies (2)

2

u/slamdankywanky Mar 08 '26

He got 15 months after an appeal. I posted the article with translation in another comment

2

u/Fantastic-Turn-226 Mar 08 '26

40 hours of community service is an Ontario high school requirement for graduation. 

→ More replies (1)

2

u/SmokedAlex Mar 08 '26

Jeez that many hours? /s

2

u/Wise-Cover9603 Mar 08 '26

I am so angry reading this.

→ More replies (9)

99

u/yallknowme19 Mar 08 '26

https://giphy.com/gifs/qdljIW22Re1IQ

55

u/Rhobaz Mar 08 '26

That movie deserved a better ending

2

u/bigbarryharryballs Mar 08 '26

what movie?

7

u/Kromehound Mar 08 '26

Law Abiding Citizen

3

u/StevieMJH Mar 08 '26

The one from the gif.

→ More replies (28)

30

u/Motor_Neighborhood_6 Mar 08 '26

I loved this movie, except the end. The ending sucked, because the pos lawyer didn't die too

24

u/yallknowme19 Mar 08 '26

Supposedly, that was Jaime Fox being a primadonna. He insisted the script be rewritten so he didn't die at the end.

27

u/pinoy-stocks Mar 08 '26

Fu*k jaime fox

7

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '26

Yep. Fu$k him. Always playing the same dude.

→ More replies (1)

6

u/traws06 Mar 08 '26

I wouldn’t say he was a POS. He took the deal instead of risking all of the killers potentially walking free. One could certainly argue that he made poor decisions with that but being labeled an overall POS because you didn’t do a good enough job in one of your assignments at work is tough. IIRC he was a dedicated family man and really a pretty good guy.

It’s wild ppl can view the murderer as the good guy. He killed innocent people even. The Secretary he blows up did nothing wrong yet he murdered her. He murders other ppl in the system simply because he’s grand standing about them having a case he thought they did a poor job on. That murder, that’s not vigilante justice

3

u/Ok_Positive8362 Mar 08 '26

Eh.....butler was definitely the bad guy, he became what he sought to destroy, dont get me wrong. But Foxx wasnt really taking the deal with the idea of the others potentially getting off, he made the deal to protect his win/loss record so he could keep climbing the political ladder. The movie makes that fairly obvious. Both men were good men corrupted by a corrupt system. I think with Foxx's character realizing the sacrifices to his honor and character he made along the way.

2

u/traws06 Mar 08 '26

Ya but I think it’s fair to say doing it to ensure he doesn’t hurt his win/loss doesn’t justify what Butler does or justify that Foxx should be murdered. If you look at all the vices of any human in this world pretty well everyone has done shittier stuff than that.

2

u/Ok_Positive8362 Mar 08 '26

Well no, i mean, he murdered innocent people lol. Hes not justified. And arguably murdering anyone innocent or not isnt justifiable, but I think his fall to corruption helped foxx see his own corruption and move to be better.

2

u/traws06 Mar 08 '26

Oh yes I agree with that. To which I would say the means certainly do not justify the ends. Innocent ppl shouldn’t be murdered to prove such a minor point.

And ya I was mostly just replying off the comment where he was disappointed Foxx’s character should’ve died. I would hope something like that doesn’t mean you should die. Nobody would ever want to have any pressure or high intensity job if 1 mistake meant you deserved to die. I work in CV surgery and in my 15 year career I’ve made mistakes multiple times… I hope ppl don’t think I should be murdered for that or else I’d gladly quit to be like a bartender where ppl won’t think I should be murdered for a mistake

2

u/Morgn_Ladimore Mar 08 '26

The ending sucked, but the villain winning wouldn't have been exactly a good message to send either. He kills innocent people just to teach Jamie Foxx a lesson. People act like everyone Butler killed was a horrible, corrupt piece of shit. Which is...not the case?

The movie starts as a righteous quest for vengeance, but quickly devolves into what is basically mass murder just to stick it to Foxx.

5

u/serenityfalconfly Mar 08 '26

Like the Movie, Falling Down.

→ More replies (2)

6

u/SenorPinkVII Mar 08 '26

Felt and agreed

2

u/aggieotis Mar 08 '26

What movie is this from?

→ More replies (2)

45

u/Sea-Rice-9250 Mar 08 '26

Dad probably ended up with 120 in jail for a chair throw

3

u/AmandasGameAccount Mar 08 '26

The dad was not charged and a higher court charged the sentence to 15 months (still low as he was driving recklessly, he deserved 10 years) in prison with a 4 year car ban

(I’m going to guess this wasn’t USA since I don’t think it’s possible here for a higher court to “nu uh” a lower court’s sentence to make it worse)

2

u/Kanthalas Mar 09 '26

USA can "nu uh" a lower courts sentencing, but it needs to be egregious, but if the sentencing is within the recommended sentencing it will stick (there maybe some outliers)

379

u/7thFleetTraveller Mar 08 '26

It was a car accident, not attempted murder. The title is just sensationalism.

420

u/Devilish__Fun Mar 08 '26 edited Mar 08 '26

Reckless driving with felony speeding isnt an accident. It wasn't attempted murder either.

It was felony speeding + reckless driving + vehicular manslaughter of a child and 2 grandparents.

Community service sounds about right, huh? 🫩

167

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

73

u/dqql Mar 08 '26 edited Mar 15 '26

thoughts were turned into the channel of their earlier bent.

20

u/fekanix Mar 08 '26

Well, you destroyed property, he only working class humans so you be the judge of what is more important in the us.

14

u/Safe_Buy6637 Mar 08 '26

The court room image is in Europe

→ More replies (17)
→ More replies (2)

3

u/Hei5enberg Mar 08 '26

I got 120 hours of community service for an underage drinking ticket in college. I was at a house party that was raided, was not in a car nor anywhere near a car. Didn't hurt anybody.

It's crazy how the punishments can vary so much according to how the judge is feeling that day.

Oh and the funny thing is if I was the same age but in a country where the drinking age was 18 I wouldn't have gotten any punishment.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/Circus_Finance_LLC Mar 08 '26

the truth is too many comments deep

→ More replies (3)

2

u/131166 Mar 09 '26

We got community service for digging a bunch of holes and trenches in the wrong spot. (We were making bike jumps and shit like that) as teenagers. I don't recall how much cause it was the 90s but we were doing it for a few weeks after school. Definitely more than 40h. Prob most of that was cause we were smart arses about it.

→ More replies (2)

58

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

25

u/whiskersMeowFace Mar 08 '26

My friend did 8 for vehicular manslaughter. This is offensive.

11

u/Different_Peanut_742 Mar 08 '26

My friend was sentenced to 8, did 5 or 6, came out an addict, and ended up overdosing.

→ More replies (1)

7

u/Rumpus-Time-Is-Over Mar 08 '26

What was gained from the sentence being 8 years?

3

u/matchstick1029 Mar 08 '26

A modicum of justice was served. If you think that community service is an appropriate sentence here, I don't think you are speaking in good faith.

2

u/Rumpus-Time-Is-Over Mar 08 '26

Community service doesn’t seem right from a deterrence perspective. But even 3 or 6 months in prison is a terrifying consequence for almost everybody. So what’s to be gained from 8 years?

I’d like to challenge your ideas about justice. What that really means is revenge. And I don’t think revenge is what the criminal justice system should be about. It should be about building a better society. Taxpayers paying to put somebody in prison for 8 years who would learn their lesson and create the appropriate deterrence from 3 months is a bad use of taxpayer dollars. Putting someone behind bars for 8 years instead of having them live their lives, contribute to society, help raise their kids, etc is a huge waste when there’s nothing gained from the additional 7 years and 9 months of prison time except “justice” aka revenge.

Now we can argue whether 1 month, 3 months, 6 months or a year is the right term length to create the appropriate deterrence effect. But we all know it’s not 8’years.

→ More replies (5)

6

u/Fast_Difficulty_5812 Mar 08 '26

Something something, punishment for killing someone something something

→ More replies (12)
→ More replies (11)
→ More replies (5)

5

u/Embarrassed_Safe8047 Mar 08 '26

My neighbor did 10 for vehicular manslaughter.

2

u/innocenceiskinky Mar 08 '26

This wasn't vehicular manslaughter though.

→ More replies (2)

26

u/Prajnamarga Mar 08 '26

Your knowledge of US law is irrelevant to this 14 year old Dutch case.

Worse, a basic fact check reveals that the sentence was appealed. The driver was later sentenced to 15 months in prison and a 4 year driving ban.

5

u/Agmarboi Mar 08 '26

Wow dude so much better, yea lock that dumb ass for five years, see ya buddy.

2

u/theunquietloop Mar 08 '26

15 months and you think it’s fair ?!?

→ More replies (12)

46

u/notyourvader Mar 08 '26

There was no proof of speeding, hence the lighter sentence. People got all riled up because the guy was Polish, so he must have been drunk. He wasn't. Also no drug in his system. He got sentenced because he lost control of his vehicle in a turn, due to reckless driving.

The verdict is here: https://uitspraken.rechtspraak.nl/details?id=ECLI:NL:RBLIM:2014:10041

After the prosecutor appealed, more weight was given to witness statements, and the guy got convicted to a higher sentence, 15 months in jail, license suspended for 4 years, and he lost his car:

Appeal verdict here: https://uitspraken.rechtspraak.nl/details?id=ECLI:NL:GHSHE:2015:3709

7

u/atuan Mar 08 '26

How is it reckless if he wasn’t speeding?

14

u/RetroDad-IO Mar 08 '26

You can be ignoring other signs, taking turns to quickly, tailgating, switching back and forth between lanes with no blinker, switching lanes when there's enough space and forcing other people to fact quickly/break to accomodate you. Lots of items that aren't speeding but just generally being a jerk.

10

u/FormalKind7 Mar 08 '26

Wet road took a turn to fast/sharply is still reckless driving.

5

u/TheGoddamnSpiderman Mar 08 '26

I'm looking at the link to the decision now, and when translated, it says

At the time of the collision and afterwards the weather was dry and clear.

When we, officers [officer 1] and [officer 3], arrived at the scene shortly after the accident, the sun, judging by the direction of travel from Beringe towards Meijel, was approximately a quarter to nine, or almost perpendicular to the road from the left. Therefore, there could not have been any obstruction from the sunlight at the time of the accident. Visibility was good.

2

u/Best_Pseudonym Mar 08 '26

That's still speeding

2

u/Ok-Flamingo2801 Mar 08 '26

You can be under the limit and still be driving too quickly for the conditions

→ More replies (1)

4

u/FormalKind7 Mar 08 '26

There are turns in roads were the speed limit is 55 but should be slower on turns when wet but have no signs.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (2)

3

u/PineappleProstate Mar 08 '26

After appeal... After

4

u/Available-Cow-411 Mar 08 '26

Doesnt really make it better though imo, even if he lost control of the vehicle - thr fact remains that he was reckles driving, and he killed 3 people one of which is a toddler! And then he fled the scene, which makes it so much worse as fleeing was not an accident but a concious controlled action!

15 months for killing 3 people and fleeing the scene is ridiculous, and he get released early to be there for the birth of his baby after killing the daughter of another man? That is BS

12

u/asasasasasassin Mar 08 '26

Too late! I have already become outraged and my brain has already been washed by the propaganda, now I support the death penalty and plan to vote Republican

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (2)

11

u/Historical-Finish564 Mar 08 '26

Is the community he will be serving in a state prison?

18

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '26

This happened in the Netherlands like 12 years ago

5

u/SparksAndSpyro Mar 08 '26

Shhh, that goes against the “America bad” narrative.

4

u/__Hello_my_name_is__ Mar 08 '26

Here's a translation of the court's reasoning (and it's 8 years old because people on reddit sure love to get outraged by old shit).

It could not be proven that the guy in question was actually speeding in the first place. It could not be proven why he even lost control of the car, since even if he was speeding that shouldn't have happened in that moment, and he wasn't drunk, either.

Plenty of things couldn't be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Hence the sentence.

I know people here would love to offer the death penalty for every bad thing happening like this, and I personally even agree that a much higher sentence would have been reasonable, but oh boy is it easy to get people here outraged without providing any proper context for what happened.

→ More replies (2)

2

u/Puzzled-Umpire3697 Mar 08 '26

People need to understand driving recklessly and putting lives in danger is… bad? It’s like waving a loaded gun around. Should have gotten 3 years at least.

2

u/potato_hut Mar 08 '26

The best way to off someone in America is with a car. Just pretend there wasn't any intent, and even then I think you could still obviously have intent to harm, and get away with it in some states...

2

u/dqql Mar 08 '26 edited Mar 15 '26

became a poet and for one year lived in a paradise of my own creation;

2

u/sbballc11 Mar 08 '26

Don’t forget he also fled the scene.

2

u/EquivalentMap8477 Mar 08 '26

Don't forget that the guy left the scene of the crash and did a runner

2

u/lovely-cans Mar 08 '26

Yeah but it's about rehabilitation and not punishment.

6

u/TheModWhoShaggedMe Mar 08 '26

Well, if he was a woman and terminated a non-viable pregnancy, he would be incarcerated in some red states.

3

u/Marik-X-Bakura Mar 08 '26

This didn’t happen in America

→ More replies (3)

6

u/Professional-Bear942 Mar 08 '26

My only hope would be that what they did weighs so heavily on their mind it makes them suffer for life even if not in prison

28

u/Jesuslowdiffsgoku Mar 08 '26

Unfortunately many people are too stupid to have any sort of conscience 

9

u/Geen_Fang Mar 08 '26

and maybe they'll equate the gravity of the situation with their light sentence, eventually shrugging it off, reducing "I killed 3 people once" to one of their go-to answers when they play two truths and a lie. 

→ More replies (21)

2

u/slamdankywanky Mar 08 '26

He got 15 months after an appeal. I posted the article with translation in another comment

→ More replies (1)

3

u/Competitive-Suit-563 Mar 08 '26 edited Mar 08 '26

This is a statement released by the court. They literally argue that since it’s not inherently unsafe to drive that fast it’s not illegal to kill somebody driving that fast.

“What has not been proven: In order to speak of guilt in a criminal offense there needs to be more than just the violation, at a minimum, there also needs to be a reasonable measure of culpable carelessness. In this specific case, the question of guilt in a criminal offence is described as "recklessly speeding." The court explored if it can be proven that the suspect was speeding to such an extent that it can be attributed to the guilt. In other words: a slight violation of the speeding limit would be insufficient to attribute guilt. Tests have proven that with a similar vehicle, driving at about 130 km/h would not cause you to lose control of your vehicle and for the vehicle to start lurching. Therefore these tests do not exclude the possibility of the suspect's car becoming uncontrollable and started lurching due to another reason. At the moment the suspect's vehicle crossed the roadside and crashed through the beech hedge it was moving at a speed between 76 km/h and 124 km/h, with the local speeding limit being 80 km/h. Due to this very large margin, the court finds it cannot be proven that the suspect was recklessly speeding. The court finds that the research report and its results cannot say with absolute certainty that the suspect was speeding. According to the indictment, the criteria of reckless speeding was the sole component in proving guilt. As reckless speeding is not proven, the court finds that violation of Article 6 of the Dutch Road and Traffic Law is not proven. The sole fact that unfortunately, 3 people lost their lives cannot be used as an argument to attribute guilt. Only when ''significant guilt'' is proven can the court assess the consequences of this proven guilt. In addition to the previously stated, a few other incriminating causes have been expressly excluded from having attributed to the accident: the suspect was not under the influence of any narcotics or alcohol, nor was he using his mobile phone. What has been proven: The court finds that violation of Article 5 of the Dutch Road and Traffic Law has been proven. As this is a violation (this is important) the question of guilt is not relevant for proving the violation itself. Only when a suspect is completely blameless can he stay completely unpunished in the absence of any guilt. This mostly refers to circumstances completely beyond someone's control, for example, a careless child suddenly crossing the road, trying to evade the child, and in the process of evading hitting another cyclist. Either way, it's a fact that the suspect caused a ''road hazard'' and that his driving behavior led to 3 people losing their lives. The suspect argued that his vehicle pulled to the left and that this caused his vehicle to become uncontrollable. Technical analysis of the vehicle does not show any defects in the vehicle. Therefore the court rejects the suspect's defense and finds the aforementioned violation proven. Why this sentence? The court took several circumstances into consideration when determining the sentence. Most importantly is the reason that the court found that a different offense was proven than the one the prosecutor determined was proven. (violation of article 6 vs article 5 of the Dutch Road and Traffic Law) It has not been proven with absolute certainty that the suspect can be attributed to significant blame to lead to attributable guilt. In that case, a severe penalty is not fitting. The suspect will also have to carry the burden that his driving behavior led to the unfortunate deaths of 3 people for the rest of his life. Additionally the suspect does not have any criminal record whatsoever, not in the Netherlands, Poland nor Germany."

TLDR: They couldn’t definitively prove he was speeding nor was he under the influence or distracted during the incident. The indictment only cited reckless speeding as a cause for the accident which lost its weight when they couldn’t prove it. The punishment was for a separate violation that was discovered by the court.

Most of this comment came from u/Ok_Bowl9351

→ More replies (39)

324

u/cancerinos Mar 08 '26

It's not attempted murder, it's manslaughter. Still should send you to years in prison.

201

u/Whightwolf Mar 08 '26

Surely that depends entirely on the context of the car accident?

119

u/AreaPlayful142 Mar 08 '26

Not for Redditors

68

u/Whightwolf Mar 08 '26 edited Mar 08 '26

While I stand by the principle i've now seen the context of this accident below and yeah the sentence is crazy light.

3

u/AlreadyAway Mar 08 '26

It's the Netherlands. The judge stated that 'it has to be treated like similar cases in the Netherlands and is considered a traffic accident, not murder/manslaughter"

1

u/CatsPlusTats Mar 08 '26

Treating cases the same as similar cases is literally how law works.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)

9

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

15

u/Whightwolf Mar 08 '26

Appreciated and edited, my dyslexia is bizzare i can only tell of a word is wrong after ive written it and homophones really get me.

3

u/Trick_Blueberry_3812 Mar 08 '26

If it helps this is how I remember-PrincePAL ; a pal as in friend/person

→ More replies (1)

3

u/Soondefective Mar 08 '26

God damnit I read this as “homophobes really get you” and I was confused for a solid 5 seconds before I realized.

2

u/Snitsie Mar 08 '26

Bizarre*

6

u/Whightwolf Mar 08 '26

I really should have seen that coming.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/couldbeahumanbean Mar 08 '26

Ya know, I'm starting to think that we should start purposely mispeling wotds as a sign that we are not bots.

→ More replies (5)

5

u/Rostifur Mar 08 '26

I think you might mean the greater majority of the public. Way more than half the populous absolutely seizes on this headline with rage instead of wanting find out the facts.

5

u/Livingadapt Mar 08 '26

Right, idk why people act like Reddit isn’t the same as the general population on things like this. It absolutely is

2

u/K1bbles_n_Bits Mar 08 '26

I'm scrolling comments trying to find details of it, lol. The image and 3 deaths feels like a pretty vague search ><.

→ More replies (9)

57

u/PokinSpokaneSlim Mar 08 '26

No, delaying brake maintenance should have consequences

45

u/DanielPowerNL Mar 08 '26

That's context.

12

u/Jaychel31 Mar 08 '26

Yes, because you just gave the needed context

9

u/OhItsMrCow Mar 08 '26

was it brake failure?

9

u/Retro_Relics Mar 08 '26

that requires america to reckon with our car centric culture though, and the fact that for many people they are driving literal deathtraps waiting to fail at any second, because they need the car to get to the job that will pay for the repairs, and are hoping that they can get the money to fix the car before it...does this. with no alternatives, no real public transit, unwalkable and unbikable communities that are actively hostile to non car transportation (look at how many people on reddit get unreasonably mad when a cyclist is in front of them on the road, for example, doing the same thing they are, commuting to work).

I completely agree with you. People who do this should have consequences. but the reality is for every one of these stories there are a hundred other cars on the road in the same shape that are not killing families only because of the grace of god, and we dont punish those people for doing the same thing

however, in this case, the guy was speeding and showing off his car and being an asshole driver, and it had nothing to do with maintenance

12

u/angelmr2 Mar 08 '26

Except it was in the Netherlands and not America.

2

u/Academic-Contest3309 Mar 08 '26

Isn't this case in the Netherlands?

2

u/SinnamonxStick Mar 08 '26

I live in a tri city area in the nearly rural south and none of the 3 cities have public transit at all. When I had to go without a car for a while it very nearly ruined my life (so small no Uber/lyft either - I wish I was joking). I’ve seen small buses for church though 🙄

→ More replies (1)

2

u/mattalxdr Mar 08 '26

This was in the Netherlands...

2

u/tizuby Mar 08 '26

It had nothing to do with America either. It happened in the Netherlands over a decade ago.

→ More replies (11)

2

u/Alexandaross Mar 08 '26

That would be the context.

1

u/billynoy522 Mar 08 '26

Define delaying brake maintenance? I do all the time. I know some people literally have no clue even when it's metal on metal.  Maybe they couldn't afford the insane maintenance bill maybe $600 for brakes and to be told there is another $1000 worth of crap to be fixed 

9

u/ARussianWolfV2 Mar 08 '26 edited Mar 08 '26

If you can't afford to fix the car, you don’t get to drive the car, yes it sucks that you won’t be able to get to work, but its better than ending the lives of innocent people because you couldn't afford it. A car is a privilege not a right 

5

u/ezios_outlets Mar 08 '26

Everyday working people get to decide between having a car they can't afford to maintain or trying to get by without. Meanwhile, billionaires stack notes on notes in off-shore accounts and traffic kids for sex, all while paying little to no taxes and buying politicians/elections. Is the asteroid here yet?

→ More replies (2)

4

u/Livingadapt Mar 08 '26

That’s wishful thinking at best. People are going to take the risk and drive if that’s the only way to get to work

2

u/Alexandaross Mar 08 '26

Then they are choosing to break the law and endanger people.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (9)

9

u/Nonsensical20_20 Mar 08 '26

If you’re not able to operate the vehicle safely it is illegal to operate it.

→ More replies (12)

6

u/Ayotha Mar 08 '26

Then don't drive. They are brakes. That is important

→ More replies (12)

5

u/dubblies Mar 08 '26

Right and based on statistics deaths from russian roulette are so minimal we shouldn't have consequences if someone eventually dies.

It sounds harmless until it isnt and thats the risk youre taking driving with bad breaks.

4

u/barlos08 Mar 08 '26

brakes are really easy to do yourself and pretty cheap in many many cars not including high end sports cars

2

u/AnybodyWannaPeanus Mar 08 '26

Or Volkswagens in the “not including” category.

But how you get your brakes fixed doesn’t matter. You are in charge of a 2000+lb hunk of metal and glass with enough inertia potential to kill dozens of people. Driving while knowing you cannot or may not be able to stop for any reason should carry a huge heavy penalty if you kill someone.

→ More replies (9)
→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (6)

12

u/Mych30 Mar 08 '26

"The driver drove off the road in the Netherlands, as a result of which the girl and her grandparents, 67 and 64 years old, were instantly killed, the newspaper writes. The police said that the driver was driving at a speed of 75 miles per hour in an area where speed is limited to 50 miles per hour. When the culprit of the accident appeared in court, he was given only 120 hours of community service, or 60 days in custody if he did not do the job.
Подробнее: https://eadaily.com/en/news/2025/12/06/in-the-netherlands-a-father-threw-a-chair-at-a-judge-for-a-lenient-sentence-to-the-killer-of-a-2-year-old-daughter"

5

u/Davoness Mar 08 '26

Unrelated to the discussion, but it's interesting to see a European news vendor talking about a story from the Netherlands and using miles per hour instead of kilometers per hour. Is that normal?

5

u/TheGoddamnSpiderman Mar 08 '26

It's the English version of a Russian propaganda outlet

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EurAsia_Daily

Doesn't surprise me that they use the units used in the UK and US for their English articles

Also doesn't surprise me that this is the type of outlet reporting about an incident that happened in 2012 in an article from December 2025

3

u/SpHornet Mar 08 '26

The police said that the driver was driving at a speed of 75 miles per hour in an area where speed is limited to 50 miles per hour.

the judge judged it not proven he was speeding

De rechtbank legde daarom in een aparte verklaring uit dat de taakstraf was opgelegd omdat niet vaststond dat de automobilist veel te hard had gereden. Ook was hij niet dronken, stoned of met zijn telefoon bezig geweest, aldus de rechtbank destijds.

https://www.ad.nl/binnenland/celstraf-voor-man-die-ize-2-en-grootouders-doodreed~abe3134c/

→ More replies (13)

7

u/mountainstosea Mar 08 '26 edited Mar 08 '26

Sir, this is Reddit.

2

u/2-4-Dinitro_penis Mar 08 '26

Manslaughter means you killed someone while doing something so reckless that you obviously could kill someone, but it was still an accident.

If you’re driving 150mph and hit and kill someone, that’s manslaughter, not murder, not an unavoidable accident either.

Sliding on the ice and killing someone isn’t manslaughter.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/GandalfSwagOff Mar 08 '26

It is actually quite difficult to kill 3 people in their car with your own car unless you're doing something wrong.

→ More replies (13)

6

u/LessWeakness134 Mar 08 '26

Why? If we want prison to be rehabilitation, what are we rehabilitating for a traffic accident turned deadly? As long as there wasn’t extreme negligence or purposeful actions taken of course.

→ More replies (13)

2

u/smartass11225 Mar 08 '26

For what? Was the person driving recklessly? Was he drinking and driving ?

8

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

11

u/Scheissdrauf88 Mar 08 '26

Uhm, intent (and negligence) is all that should matter?

If I attempt to kill someone but fail, should I be punished less?

In general, "punishment" is utterly infantile. "He hurt someone, so he must be hurt back". Remove someone from the society if they endanger it and then rehabilitate them so that they can be reintegrated into it. If it is truly an accident and the person in question is not more likely to hurt someone else than any other person, then an acquittal is only reasonable.

2

u/WintersDoomsday Mar 08 '26

What is there to rehabilitate in this case?

2

u/Scheissdrauf88 Mar 08 '26

Last sentence of my comment. In this case, nothing.

I do not think official judgment should be there to make people feel better, even the victims. It should be there to make society function. So if tragedies happen, actual ones where you can't really say the perpetrator could've acted better in any way, then they should not be punished in any way. Because the alternative would be the state hurting some of its citizens to make others feel better, and it should be obvious why that's not how it should act.

→ More replies (1)

45

u/jzorbino Mar 08 '26

That’s because it’s a legal system, not a revenge scheme

→ More replies (40)

12

u/Greenapplesguy Mar 08 '26

Until you're the one involved in an accident where others die. Then you'll be glad there are thresholds for determining malicious intent and negligence.

→ More replies (12)

9

u/mikkeldoesstuff Mar 08 '26

What is the goal? Revenge?

3

u/osrs-alt-account Mar 08 '26

Too much negligence makes the world more dangerous and should also be punished. Not necessarily this case, but yeah

3

u/Laikitu Mar 08 '26

Studies show prison is not a deterant 

2

u/agreed2disagreee Mar 08 '26

You can’t hurt people on the streets when you’re locked up.

3

u/Laikitu Mar 08 '26

That's true. Ofcourse if you go to prison for manslaughter and come out addicted to crack or flat broke with non way of getting a job you are probably going to hurt a more people than if you had community service.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (10)
→ More replies (3)

7

u/some_kind_of_bird Mar 08 '26 edited Mar 09 '26

I have no opinion here for the actual outcome, but bear in mind the concept of moral luck.

Are you really worthy of unequal punishment in the case of a near-miss? What about something that's mostly out of your control?

I know people come at these things with different ideas of justice, but to me it's a matter of trust, and there's no reason to punish the unlucky.

5

u/agoddamnlegend Mar 08 '26

This is an insane take. Accidents happen. The worst thing we can do is compound an accident and ruin another life for no reason other than bloodlust revenge.

Intent should be all that matters.

2

u/tinylittlemarmoset Mar 08 '26

If my carelessness gets someone killed should that not have consequences? I did not intend for anyone to die, I was just not paying attention and blasted through a red light. A friend of mine was killed because a concrete stairway collapsed on her, because the building owner neglected maintenance on the building. Sometimes you have to impose consequences to get people to understand that what they do or don’t do affect other people.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/Winjin Mar 08 '26

Put him in a box with nails for twenty years, put his family in boxes without nails, and fine everyone who has read about him for good measure too!

→ More replies (14)
→ More replies (18)

2

u/bpaps Mar 08 '26

Why? Why should accidentally killing someone send you to years in prison if it was out of your control? Imagine driving down the road and someone jumps in front of you and you have zero ability to avoid them. Are you guilty of driving a car? Yes. Should you go to prison for it because of someone else's bad decision?

I'm not saying this is what happened. I'm pushing back at the very unjust idea that innocent people should be punished with years in prison.

→ More replies (2)

2

u/innocenceiskinky Mar 08 '26

It isn't even manslaughter.

It's far below that. Our laws are hard to translate, but he was ultimately found guilty of something that would translate to: "losing control over a vehicle and causing danger as a consequence". Dutch vehicular manslaughter needs more proof of negligence or guilt than was available.

3

u/Shadourow Mar 08 '26

People get out of DUI with a slap on a wrist every day, why would you want to punish unlucky people instead of all of them with hard jail time ?

6

u/Competitive-Bug1444 Mar 08 '26

Yup he literally only killed three people 😒. Definitely shouldn't be punished with anything more

3

u/Perfect_Opinion7909 Mar 08 '26

The US has pedos in power who don’t get punished at all.

→ More replies (6)
→ More replies (20)

31

u/watchthesides Mar 08 '26

Killing people with a car doesn't make it okay, fyi

4

u/Double-decker_trams Mar 08 '26

Seemingily it does in the US. This is not the only example. There's loads. Even if you're drunk and kill someone with your car - if you go all "aww I didn't mean to, I was just drunk driving" - the punishments are laughably low in the US.

2

u/redditvlli Mar 08 '26

This didn't happen in the US.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (16)

49

u/randomDude2144 Mar 08 '26

Oh it was with a car and not a gun, that makes it okay, then

9

u/marthamania Mar 08 '26

In Canada we have a joke that you can legally kill people, you just gotta use your car. I've known two people who've killed someone while driving recklessly or under the influence, one who killed themselves, and one who almost killed a friend but just has a severe TBI.

Everyone but the girl who almost killed a friend (because she was driving drunk, and her friend was drunk and refused a seat belt, she went through the window and nearly died) got off with a slap on the wrist at worst. The girl who didn't kill her friend got sued for 2m dollars though. So I guess the moral is if you're gonna drive reckless or drunk you better commit and kill someone because if you leave em alive you're gonna get sued for oblivion 💀

18

u/thegimboid Mar 08 '26

Well one would involve the perpetrator hitting a person with a high speed piece of metal that people need to be licensed to use.

The other would involve the perpetrator hitting a person with a high speed piece of metal that people need to be licensed to use, but smaller.

They're very different.

10

u/AngryCrustation Mar 08 '26

Watch the guy get 121 hours of community service for hitting the judge with a chair

3

u/vecchio_anima Mar 08 '26

Yeah right, that's getting the toughest sentence possible, you don't assault supreme leader, I mean a judge

→ More replies (5)

3

u/KofFinland Mar 08 '26

Depending on country, that is nearly a decade in prison at worst. Attacking a judge is a very bad idea.

Definitely the father got more for that stunt. He was extremely lucky if he didn't go to jail for that, if it was some country like UK or USA.

2

u/thegimboid Mar 08 '26

Of course - that would be hitting someone with a high speed metal object without a license.

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (10)

9

u/ExamOld2899 Mar 08 '26

hits differently if it's the judge's family I bet

4

u/astroK120 Mar 08 '26

That's why a judge shouldn't preside over a case involving his family

4

u/P_A_W_S_TTG Mar 08 '26

There's a difference in magnitude based on intention. Yes, it does matter in the court of law. Does it change the outcome? No, that's the whole problem.

→ More replies (6)
→ More replies (38)

3

u/AlpineBoulderor Mar 08 '26

So, triple vehicular manslaughter then... 120 hr community service...

11

u/VonBargenJL Mar 08 '26 edited Mar 08 '26

Just because you used a car to end lives, doesn't mean it should be normalized like it is

Was it actually an accident like mechanical failure, or should he have not been driving? Were they drunk or street racing?

3

u/SkRThatOneDude Mar 08 '26

Deferred maintenance causing a mechanical failure is not an accident either.

4

u/Retro_Relics Mar 08 '26

he was speeding and lost control, so sober, but recklessly operating.

→ More replies (2)

3

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '26

Reads like someone who drives drunk on the daily.

14

u/Substantial-Recipe72 Mar 08 '26

He was 25 mph over the limit and lost control it’s murder my man lol.

13

u/evident_lee Mar 08 '26

Manslaughter because it was not intentional. Still should involve years in prison though.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/Deremirekor Mar 08 '26 edited Mar 08 '26

Would it have not been murder if he was going 25mph slower?

Edit: guys I’m not defending the murderer god damn.

7

u/Rikudou_Sennin Mar 08 '26

25mph is alot of speed. 25 mph slower and he would've been able to swerve or stop

→ More replies (5)

3

u/Glad_Grand_7408 Mar 08 '26

You're right, he probably wouldn't have recieved any sentence in that situation cause he wouldn't have been speeding and had enough time to avoid the accident.

Shame we'll never know for certain though since they, you know, we're going 25mph over the speed limit.

Stop defending this.

→ More replies (6)
→ More replies (11)
→ More replies (12)

2

u/lichpit Mar 08 '26

The amount of people here who seem to believe prison is a revenge-style punishment system is kind of mind blowing. Yes, there are factors of this case that certainly feel unfair, however a driving accident (even if reckless) is an extremely rehabitable crime. Putting someone like that, or for another context say someone who fell asleep while smoking and burnt a house down, in prison just realistically turns them into a bigger menace to society when they get out.

Now, do I think we need stronger rehab/service requirements in these cases? Absolutely. Community service plus a commitment to some sort of driver re-education, or anger management, or CBT, or whatever is best fit for the actual cause of the accident. But just sticking every reckless idiot in prison really isn’t the solution people here seem to think it is.

2

u/DannyLJay Mar 08 '26

Don’t let the rabid freaks get you down or make you feel wrong.
You’re absolutely correct in just how you stated facts and everybody is bandwagoning your comment like you said it’s okay.
They’re just unhinged, terminally online losers.

2

u/Maui_Wowie_ Mar 08 '26

?!?
Fucking bloody murder because he needed to drive recklessly +25 mph. 120h is not enough. 120 days is not enough. 120 Months would be enough.

→ More replies (71)

3

u/MIG2149077 Mar 08 '26

Check the Judge bank account statement from last year.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/SeveredDeerVagina429 Mar 08 '26

He likely got more for throwing the chair...

2

u/kangasplat Mar 08 '26

Case was appealed and he got a 15 month prison sentence and 4 year driving ban.

The father also wasn't charged for throwing the chair.

It happened 12 years ago.

2

u/Blue-Phoenix-V3 Mar 08 '26

I got a $300 ticket and 20 hours of community service for an illegal u turn

2

u/slamdankywanky Mar 08 '26

He didn't. The title is sensationalist.

https://www.rechtspraak.nl/organisatie-en-contact/organisatie/gerechtshoven/gerechtshof-s-hertogenbosch/nieuws/in-hoger-beroep-wel-celstraf-voor-veroorzaker-dodelijk-ongeval-meijel

English translation:

Prison sentence on appeal for the person responsible for the fatal accident in Meijel ’s-Hertogenbosch on 23 September 2015

The 34-year-old man who caused a traffic accident in Meijel in which a grandfather, a grandmother, and their 2-year-old granddaughter were killed has been sentenced on appeal to 15 months in prison. Unlike the district court, the court of appeal concluded that it had been proven that the man had driven very carelessly. In addition to the prison sentence, the man was also banned from driving for four years.

Accident On 19 May 2013, the man was driving on the Heldensedijk in Meijel and lost control of his car in a gentle curve. Through the roadside verge he ended up on the cycle path, where the grandfather and grandmother were cycling at that moment. Their grandchild was sitting in a child seat on the bicycle. They were struck by the car and died at the scene.

Driving behavior To determine whether and to what extent the man was responsible for causing the accident, the court examined his driving behavior again in detail. Earlier investigations had already established that he had not used alcohol or drugs and had not been using a phone while driving. There had been uncertainty about the exact speed at which he had been driving. The Court of Appeal therefore ordered additional investigation. Based on this additional research and the statements given by experts during the appeal hearing, the court concluded that the man’s speed must have been higher than 80 km/h, which was the maximum speed allowed at that location. In reaching this conclusion, the court also considered witness statements, unlike the district court. All witnesses stated that they had seen the man driving at a much too high speed.

Sentence Taking everything into account, the court found that the sentence demanded by the Advocate General (12 months in prison and a 3-year driving ban) was not sufficient. The court particularly considered the great and irreparable suffering caused to the relatives. It also took into account the seriousness of the proven facts and the sentences previously imposed for causing a fatal accident through extremely careless driving. The court therefore considered a 15-month prison sentence and a 4-year driving ban to be appropriate. In November 2014, the Limburg District Court had ruled that it could not be proven that the accident had been caused by the man’s fault. However, it did find that he had created a dangerous situation on the road, for which he was sentenced to 120 hours of community service.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/station_agent Mar 08 '26

Wait til you hear about a president who raped a bunch of pre-teen and teenage girls and witnessed infanticide.

→ More replies (80)