Originally Posted by grimlock
It is not accurate to say he decided he was going to kill the guy to punish him for laughing at him. What is more likely is he was so enraged he kept beating him in a craze, and the man died from his injuries. Now some would say it's the same thing, but under the law it is not. If there is evidence for 'murder' which is the intent to kill, rather than the lesser administering of a beating, then that is how he would be charged. In this way, if the accused had left, came back a few hours later, and beat him to death, I think that would be more 'murder' than manslaughter (again, not a lawyer) because he would have had time to cool down and thus 'planned' the assault and the 'result' of death could have been more foreseen and less attributable to emotion or self-defense.
The more you scream at me that I am mental the more I get the idea you have rage issues..
Anyone with a higher IQ than a chimp, could tell you that stomping and kicking on a 56 year old's head who is on the floor could kill them! And you say this man deserves no more than 11 years, that is sick.