Well folks, we have another murder case, this time it was at a neighborhood barbeque. This even took place in northern California and apparently there had been a feud going on between two families for some time. So rather than talking it out, putting aside differences, signing a peace treaty, 24 year old Orlando Lopez and another guy, 22 year old Paul Braden fire shotguns at the family which kills a four year (Skyler Rapp) old boy and wounds five other individuals including the boy's mother. A mom loses her child, is injured, however, I bet the injury is no where near the pain of losing her child at such a young age. Lopez was handed a 311 year sentence (why not just say life w/o parole?). I don't believe he intentionally killed that child, but I do believe that the motives behind the shooting rampage were probably ridiculous. Now I know some may say the justice system is kind of screwed b/c there are people who kill much more and get a lighter sentence. That's true, and 311 years does seem a bit much when you first hear it. However, I think it's nice that not all judges operate the same and this judge handed a well justified sentence. So why argue about that, the point is a child died, a mom lost her child all because of a feud between two families. What do you think? Was the sentence a bit harsh? Do you think it was justified? Why?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/09/orlando-lopez-sentenced_n_1761067.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000003
