CAMBRIDGE, Mass. - A man who beat to death another father in front of their children at a youth hockey practice was sentenced to six to 10 years in prison Friday for involuntary manslaughter.

Thomas Junta, 44, had asked to be put on supervised probation with community service. He had faced up to 20 years.

Anyone following this? What do y'all think of the sentence?

-- Anonymous, January 25, 2002

Answers

SIX TO TEN?

That is insanity, truly. He killed another father right in front of all those kids. He should go to jail forever, for real.

-- Anonymous, January 25, 2002

INVOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER. I haven't been following the case taht carefully but I am surprised. involuntary? hmmmmmm.

-- Anonymous, January 25, 2002

We all had Court TV on at work...

It sounded like the judge would have given him more time in jail if the prosecution had asked (the maximum sentence is 20 years; normal sentence for first-time offenders is 3-5, according to what I've read). He ripped the defense attorney a new one.

-- Anonymous, January 25, 2002

It WAS involuntary. They were fighting. The other man died. The entire thing makes me sad.

Involuntary manslaughter is an unintentional killing as a result of a battery in which the defendant knew or should have known a human life was endangered. (from CNN)

-- Anonymous, January 25, 2002

It was indeed involuntary, but I've never been impressed with the "Yeah, I meant to hurt him really bad but not quite kill him" school of defense, and that seemed to be what the defense was trying to prove.

And he did this in front of kids, and if you have that kind of rage in you, I think the sentence is pretty appropriate.

-- Anonymous, January 25, 2002

Hannah, I know the elements to involuntary manslaughter. I'm just surprised. There were two separate fights which kinda brings out the involuntary part. He was so much bigger than the other guy. Manslaughter could have fit from what I understand about the facts of the case.

-- Anonymous, January 25, 2002

Yeah, technically I guess it was "involuntary," though I wonder how the defense could prove it. Plenty of people get intentionally murdered in fights. If you're mad enough to beat someone to death in front of a bunch of kids, you probably go into it wanting to kill the guy when you start whaling on him.

Six years is definitely not a long enough sentence for taking a parent away from a child right, and in front of his eyes.

-- Anonymous, January 25, 2002

Voluntary manslaughter applies to cases where you have so much rage that you just kills the other person out of anger. The classic example is the man who comes home to find his wife in bed with another man and shoots them both.

1. Four elements: Assuming that the facts would otherwise constitute murder, D is entitled to a conviction on the lesser charge of voluntary manslaughter if he meets four requirements: [250]

a. Reasonable provocation: He acted in response to a provocation that would have been sufficient to cause a reasonable person to lose his self-control. [250]

b. Actually act in “heat of passion”: D was in fact in a “heat of passion” at the time he acted; [250]

c. No time for reasonable person to cool off: The lapse of time between the provocation and the killing was not great enough that a reasonable person would have “cooled off,” i.e., regained his self- control; [250] and

d. D not in fact cooled off: D did

Mutual combat where it can't be determined who actually started the fight (this means coming to blows part of fight) counts under voluntary manslaughter.

-- Anonymous, January 25, 2002

Sorry guys. that is from Emmanuel's (it's a study guide for law students) outlines.

Even the defense of the other guy started it and I was just defending myself and accidentally killed him is more a defense to voluntary manslaughter. The defense knew that they had him on that.

He must have had a good attorney or the government attorney must have sucked. I mean all those kids crying going "he killed my Daddy" Or they must have had one educated jury.

-- Anonymous, January 25, 2002

I belive Law and Order can help solve this voluntary v. involuntary debate.

The Law and order principle that applies is this: When deciding which level of severity is needed when charging a defendent, remember that the rate of conviction on the more severe charge is inversely proportional to the guilt of the defendant.

In other words, the more obviously guilty the defendant, the greater the risk that he will get off if you go with the more severe charge. Thus always go for the easier conviction when dealing with really guilty people.

-- Anonymous, January 25, 2002

Hannah, I know the elements to involuntary manslaughter.

Who said you didn't? I was just putting it out there for those of us who didn't go to law school.

From what I've read, I also think the fact that this guy had no prior record, and that the other father was in NO way an innocent bystander played a big role in the verdict.

-- Anonymous, January 25, 2002

One thing I've learned from my fiance, a practicing litigator, is that unless you are in the courtroom and you hear and see every speck of evidence and testimony (CourtTV be damned), it's nearly impossible to gather an accurate assesment of what actually happened surrounding a crime.

Hannah's right - the father who was killed had a role in starting the fight. He was foolish to think he could come out of fisticuffs with a guy Junta's size unscathed - but that doesn't mean that he deserved to die. Involuntary manslaughter, as horrific as the crime was, sounds about right - but I say that only knowing what I've read about the case, which is probably only about 15% of what actually went on inside the courtroom.

-- Anonymous, January 25, 2002

From what I've read, I also think the fact that this guy had no prior record...

Well, he sort of did. From the AP story:

Some previous incidents in Junta's life, which were not brought up at trial, were taken into consideration for the sentencing.

Junta's wife, Michelle, was granted a restraining order in 1991 when she alleged that he beat her in front of their two children and another child. A court ordered Junta out of the couple's apartment and gave his wife temporary custody of the children.

So the jury didn't take that into account for its verdict, but the judge did for his sentencing.

-- Anonymous, January 25, 2002

OH crap the other guy was a big ole outlaw

Costin, 40, had four children, ages 11 through 14. His father, Gus, said Costin had a drinking problem and had been in and out of prison for much of his adult life. But he had quit drinking and was working steadily as a carpenter and painter, he said.

Six months before he was killed, he regained custody of his children.

"Don't worry about what the judge says today, Mr. Junta," Gus Costin said Friday. "Worry about what the judge upstairs is going to say. That's eternity." Costin's sister, Mary Barbuzzi, and prosecutors said they considered the sentence fair.

"We believe justice has been served," Barbuzzi said. "Our prayers will be with the Junta

Ahhhh I didn't know that. That would make the whole 'defending himself' thing more credible to a jury.' ahhhh.

It is true T. You gotta see the whole case and the whole case as the jury saw it. (example OJ SImpson: the TV viewers saw a lot more evidence than the sequestered jurors)

-- Anonymous, January 25, 2002

Man. It's just all too gross and sad. Poor kids.

-- Anonymous, January 25, 2002

Then again the jury wouldn't hear of the man's prior record unless he testifies as impeachment or if it was a violent offense to show pattern. hmmmmm. dammit I wish I had court TV.

The jury in Junta's trial had determined Junta didn't intend to kill Costin but that he went too far. During testimony, a medical examiner said Costin suffered severe brain injuries that could have resulted from his head being beaten into the floor. Junta had said he tried to avoid the fight and only hit Costin in self-defense.

Now Junta being so much bigger than Costin and hitting him in the head in self defense that ultimately kills Costin. Okay involuntary. Taking Costin's head and pounding it into the pavement which the coroner believes is a possible cause of death. EH I'm not sure that would be involuntary. I think that crosses the line. I see that as an agressive act. An act that one should know has the potential to kill someone.

I think the law and order principle you speak concerns prosecutors charging people Chris. I'm not sure how this applies here with the jury decision.

Sorry Hannah, I took your previous comment to be snippier than you intended.

-- Anonymous, January 25, 2002

Since we're in Boston they had the trial on in the lunchroom the whole time. I only saw parts of it and some things on teh news but:

1) Junta started the disagreement with Dead Guy because the game was supposed to be no contact (no contact hockey? inconceivable) and Dead Guy was the parent coach. Yelling led to fighting.

2) Testimony by Some Punk Kid in a Tie indicated that at some point the fight ended, Dead Guy was walking away, Junta followed, grabbed him, and started it up again.

3) Several witnesses did see Junta pick up Dead Guy's head and slam it down on the floor several times while at least two other parents tried to pull him off.

Starting a fight is one thing. Pursuing a guy who walked away is another and slamming his head repeatedly into the floor is a whole other ball of wax. Feeling around here was that he got lucky to get involuntary manslaughter and he should shut his big meaty head up about community service.

-- Anonymous, January 25, 2002

See the slamming the guys head against the floor thing is the thing I've consistently heard. That's not self defense, that's a big ole can of whoop ass.

-- Anonymous, January 26, 2002

I can't help but be stunned by the irony that this man killed the coach at the rink after berating the coach for allowing too much violence during a hockey game.

-- Anonymous, January 26, 2002

Based on the sentence, I'm thinking the judge thought it should have been voluntary manslaughter as well.

Starting a fight is one thing. Pursuing a guy who walked away is another and slamming his head repeatedly into the floor is a whole other ball of wax.

That's what gets me. You start a fight with someone, kill him, and then say it's not a big deal because it was a fistfight and you were defending yourself? Yeah, I can't figure out why the judge wasn't impressed with that line of defense either.

-- Anonymous, January 28, 2002