I wasn't there so I did not hear the details of the court proceedings and what may be mitigating circumstances.
Isn't that what they say when the public expresses dissatisfaction at a sentence for criminal behaviour? You need to listen to the whole court case.
So Kieran Loveridge marauds around King Cross in Sydney, punching people at random. One of those he punched died as a result of his punch. The often less than impressive NSW police force for once stepped up to the crease and identified the assailant, gathered good evidence, presented a good case to the court and then what happened? The police did their job well and Loveridge was found guilty.
And then it all goes wrong when he is sentenced. Four years gaol, for multiple assaults, one resulting in a death.
I expect the Crown Prosecuter will appeal the sentence. It damn well ought to. After all, Loveridge did kill someone, and it was hardly an accident. The sentence was clearly inadequate.
Please speak up and tell me where my thinking has gone wrong and why the assailant should not have been locked up for 25 years.