Yep bonfire night was the highlight of the year, burn everything up [emoji33] Sent from my iPhone using FerrariChat
Actually they don't and that's the problem- give off lots of toxic fumes and you're still left with an blob of melted plastic at the bottom when you're done. The extreme temperatures needed to truly 'burn' plastics like EPS means that cost is higher than the small amount of usable residual material obtained.
RIP Marty The Super Flying Fun Show was a favourite of mine as a kid https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/tv/beloved-australian-entertainer-marty-morton-dies-aged-82/news-story/457d0f74afdc01d17d41a9777b0aef18
It wouldn't surprise me to read in the future that this bloke takes the short way out,presuming he's feeling the amount of guilt he should feel. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-09-11/brett-button-sentenced-fatal-hunter-valley-bus-crash-driver/104337210
I must say I'm very conflicted by this verdict - yes, he definitely caused the death of 10 innocent people BUT there was no intention to do so. His life is ruined anyway. Some of the incredibly malicious, pre-meditated murderers of single people are out in a few years. This sentence seems a bit 'grandstanding' for want of a better word.
His manner of driving negates his 'lack of intention'. He can drive like that on his own but the consequences with 30 people on board is pure negligence.
Fully agree, I've followed this case since the start , reading the judge's summary of the case put forward and the evidence only a FOOL would think otherwise that the sentence was incorrect or too harsh !
Yes but 'negligence' is not intent. Be interesting to see what sort of sentences the recent cases of child homicide will attract.
If a foreseeable outcome of an act or omission is, in this instance, a crash could occur and people die then that is intent ie: I didn't intend to crash but driving the way I did a crash was possible. Your version has no hope in court - there is a tonne of case law on this.
Overdosing on Tramadol changes that point of view IMO. And the fact he doesn't think he was negligent,sort of cancels each other out.IMO.
No I'm not saying he should be let iff in any way, just it seems like they made a huge sentence because there were 10 people involved whereas often 1 person intentionally and viciously murdered gets off with a much lighter sentence.
Sentencing is driven by precedent and can be quite confusing at times. In many cases the Judge's hands are effectively tied as to what sentence they can give without being overturned in the Appeals Court. I've always found it odd that the financial planner who steals your money will get more gaol time than someone who does a violent home invasion. On the other hand I met a guy in his forties who had done 2 seperate stints for murder - 10 to 12 years seem to be the norm unless you are naughty in gaol or won't tell where the body is..
RIP Lex. One of first wogs on Aussie TV https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/australian-actor-lex-marinos-dies-surrounded-by-family-aged-75/news-story/ff8b260c75141787768a7f8b6a0565df
Jayzus! Didn't see this coming,how do the victims' families get over this decision: https://www.news.com.au/national/victoria/courts-law/william-swale-driver-set-to-learn-if-he-will-face-trial-over-horror-crash-at-the-royal-daylesford-hotel/news-story/0c308137f4d005d5fc8c5865bbd2a96f
