Why Ronald Thistle's sentence isn't based on retribution

A jail sentence — no matter how lengthy — can't bring back someone who was killed because of a crime. 

Likewise, a sentence isn't a measurement of a person's worth. 

But that's difficult to reconcile when a family faces a person who's responsible for changing their lives forever. 

This came to mind on Wednesday, when Ronald Thistle, 67, was sentenced to two years less a day for killing Nick Coates.

Thistle was driving impaired when he drove his truck in Coates' path on a busy St. John's street on Aug. 16, 2013.

Coates' family said Thursday they're pleased with Thistle's sentence, given Justice Carl Thompson sided with the Crown, and gave Thistle six months more than what the defence was asking. 

They seemed to understand Thompson is bound by laws that he needs to follow.

However, the public seems to find it difficult to rationalize a two-year sentence for a crime that ended in death.  

"He should have got life imprisonment with no chance of parole for purposely ending another person's life for no reason," one comment on CBC's website said about Thistle's sentence.

"This is a joke! This innocent man's family's life has been destroyed and nearly torn apart, and this drunk gets to walk the streets (thankfully he can't drive any more) a free man," wrote another.

"Is that all a person's life is worth these days?"

What's a sentence supposed to do?

A sentence is supposed to do many things — too many to list in one web article.

What it isn't supposed to be is an eye-for-an-eye punishment, although some would say it should be.

And a judge can't hand a person a life sentence just because a crime, in someone's eyes, is abhorred.

St. John's defence lawyer Bob Buckingham put it like this: "We don't go for retribution, we don't deal with the penalties on a visceral response and an emotional response to offences." 

"We look at all of the factors. If we are to do sentencing on the basis of the visceral response of the victim, we'd have our prisons full and that's a different type of justice." 

Judges in Canada are bound by principles of sentencing.

In Thistle's case, his sentence was meant to deter the public from drinking and driving, punishing the offender, while giving them a chance to rehabilitate into society.

As you've heard on television crime shows, the punishment must fit the crime.

"We have a problem in this country with drinking and driving and an individual judge's decision is not going to change that," Buckingham said.

"There is an upset, and sometimes an outrage, when individuals do cause death of serious injury and people don't think the sentence is strong enough but that's the range of the case law that we've developed."

Longer sentences would deter impaired drivers: Terry Coates

For Coates' father and stepmother, they want to take their upset and lobby for changes to Canadian laws. 

"I think if they see a bigger sentence it was deter them from drinking and driving," said Coates' father Terry Coates. 

Coates and his wife Patricia said they are going to take criminology courses to help in their lobbying for stiffer penalties.

"What's the difference between walking out with a loaded gun or getting behind the wheel of a car and killing someone?" Patricia Coates said.

"There is no difference in my book."