Obvious joke is not so obvious 
@Jem83 Love the dog tho; looks so adorable, yet classy and sophisticated.
Buy on AliExpress.com
Massimo Carrera (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter CORVETTE
- Start date
Obvious joke is not so obvious @Jem83 Love the dog tho; looks so adorable, yet classy and sophisticated.
Buy on AliExpress.com
Lovely 
http://www.sportmediaset.mediaset.i...105734/juve-2-anni-e-6-mesi-per-carrera.shtml
2 years and 6 months...
2 years and 6 months...
As far as I'm aware the girls were in a car which had an accident, they were stationary, then another car hit them at speed, then Carrera's car after that.
I've seen the pictures of their car and it is completely crushed at the back, so I'm not sure if they were out of the car and inspecting damage or they were sitting in the back of the car.
Carrera's defense say that he couldn't see the cars until too late to avoid the crash.
I've seen the pictures of their car and it is completely crushed at the back, so I'm not sure if they were out of the car and inspecting damage or they were sitting in the back of the car.
Carrera's defense say that he couldn't see the cars until too late to avoid the crash.
Just read another source.
The girls were in a Ford Ka, which was hit hard by a Fiat Punto and flipped over. The Fiat Punto was then hit by a Mercedes R-Class. As the occupants were getting out of the cars Carrera in his Mercedes came up from behind and hit the Ford Ka, which it is alleged he couldn't see because the lights were off or damaged.
Other footage suggests that the danger was quite present at the time of his collision, which would explain any sentence. The drivers of the Fiat Punto and Mercedes R-Class were also charged.
The girls were in a Ford Ka, which was hit hard by a Fiat Punto and flipped over. The Fiat Punto was then hit by a Mercedes R-Class. As the occupants were getting out of the cars Carrera in his Mercedes came up from behind and hit the Ford Ka, which it is alleged he couldn't see because the lights were off or damaged.
Other footage suggests that the danger was quite present at the time of his collision, which would explain any sentence. The drivers of the Fiat Punto and Mercedes R-Class were also charged.
Interesting.
Isn't there a coroner report of some sort? Probably very difficult to establish but; if it could be established that the girls died on impact when the Fiat Punto flipped the Ford Ka over, Carrera could not be convicted of culpable homicide, as the girls were already dead. He could only then be fined for reckless driving.
But in all probability it all happened very fast, and it probably can't be established which of the impacts killed the girls. They are viewing the incident as a whole. Hence he is dragged into the culpable homicide-case.
Medical science and technology could surely inform us of which of the hits were the cause of death, no?
You examine the two bodies, analyze where their heaviest damages are - the ones that had to have caused death - you compare it with where they were, how they sat in the car and with the first and second impacts of the cars that crashed into the Ford Ka. Provided that all facts on these matters are gathered, of course.
Although difficult, it should be possible to establish from that whether the heaviest injuries causing death had to have come from the Fiat Punto or Carrera's Mercedes.
- - - Updated - - -
Final point: I'm not disputing Carrera's recklessness, that's an entirely different topic. Recklessness on his part may or may not have been present. I know too little facts to have an informed opinion on that. But what I'm trying to illustrate here is that recklessness isn't enough, the recklessness has to be linked to death in order to be convicted for culpable homicide. Classic "cause/effect"-considerations will come into play, considerations we all know from other fields of science. Although the cause/effect-consideration in Criminal Law is based on legal principles (normative) rather than the ones from the natural sciences (descriptive), you still have to be able to say that Carrera's action was a condition (conditio sine qua non) for their death.
You have to be able to link Carrera's culpa to their death, like that.
Looking at the facts JuveJay posted, I think serious doubt could be cast on whether such a link exists.
Isn't there a coroner report of some sort? Probably very difficult to establish but; if it could be established that the girls died on impact when the Fiat Punto flipped the Ford Ka over, Carrera could not be convicted of culpable homicide, as the girls were already dead. He could only then be fined for reckless driving.
But in all probability it all happened very fast, and it probably can't be established which of the impacts killed the girls. They are viewing the incident as a whole. Hence he is dragged into the culpable homicide-case.
Medical science and technology could surely inform us of which of the hits were the cause of death, no?
You examine the two bodies, analyze where their heaviest damages are - the ones that had to have caused death - you compare it with where they were, how they sat in the car and with the first and second impacts of the cars that crashed into the Ford Ka. Provided that all facts on these matters are gathered, of course.
Although difficult, it should be possible to establish from that whether the heaviest injuries causing death had to have come from the Fiat Punto or Carrera's Mercedes.
- - - Updated - - -
Final point: I'm not disputing Carrera's recklessness, that's an entirely different topic. Recklessness on his part may or may not have been present. I know too little facts to have an informed opinion on that. But what I'm trying to illustrate here is that recklessness isn't enough, the recklessness has to be linked to death in order to be convicted for culpable homicide. Classic "cause/effect"-considerations will come into play, considerations we all know from other fields of science. Although the cause/effect-consideration in Criminal Law is based on legal principles (normative) rather than the ones from the natural sciences (descriptive), you still have to be able to say that Carrera's action was a condition (conditio sine qua non) for their death.
You have to be able to link Carrera's culpa to their death, like that.
Looking at the facts JuveJay posted, I think serious doubt could be cast on whether such a link exists.
No, you don't necessarily have to serve. It will be like what we in Norway call "betinget eller ubetinget fengsel" (conditioned or unconditioned sentence, for lack of a better translation). It depends on the severity of his actions and past criminal record. He probably won't go to jail, based on what I've come to know thus far. I'd have to have a look at the constitutive elements of the italian norm for culpable homicide to be absolutely certain, though. But most likely no, he will not serve time.
- - - Updated - - -
But if the verdict was to stand, he will technically and officially be a "killer" (not a murderer but a killer), and I can't see how Juventus would want a killer running around at Vinovo. He could be fired.
- - - Updated - - -
But if the verdict was to stand, he will technically and officially be a "killer" (not a murderer but a killer), and I can't see how Juventus would want a killer running around at Vinovo. He could be fired.
