whhaaaaattt? what Judge/court was smoking what drug when they came up with this one.

From the decision:

"If we were now to deem Ms. Quinn a victim under the (Crime Victims Rights Act), the Antrobuses would gain several rights, including the right to restitution and to speak at Mr. Hunter's sentencing hearing," the court said. "The right to speak at sentencing could only be vindicated by reopening the sentencing proceeding. To our knowledge, there is no precedent � nor any compelling justification � for allowing a nonparty, post-judgment appeal that would reopen a defendant's sentence and affect the defendant's rights."

In other words, the justices correctly declined to make up new law out of thin air in order to satisfy on individual's desire for justice, no matter how much she might deserve it.

The justices deserve praise, not scorn.

I'm glad to see they made the right decision.

The message here is despite the nature and the results of the crime the law simply can not be re-written on a whim to suit every victim or perp. My heart goes out to all of the families involved in this tragedy but the law worked exactly as it should have.

I empathize with the victim. However, since the gun was sold 8 months prior to the tragedy, I can't believe it is reasonable blame the seller for the gunman's decision. Had it happened within days of the shooting, one might think otherwise.

Can't believe how far whiners go to make an easy buck. How far back in a crime does justice go in determing fault and responsibility in criminal actions? Crimes are committed by individual choices by individuals, just because there is a chain of events does not make every link in the chain responsible for individuals choices. It's like saying this guys grandparents are also responsible for his actions because of chain of events that led to his birth. People are getting rediculous in trying to pass the buck and gain money for their problems. And its clear that greed is what she is after, some money. She may have been a victim of the first party, the shooter, but the thrid party can't be held liable for first party actions. She should be suing the parents of the shooter who were responsible for raising their son in a more responsible enviornment. The legal and justice system is being used for greed and avarice with victims wanting to blame every body for their becoming a victim.

While I sympathise with the family and the victim, I think the court made the correct legal decision in this case.

The boy who sold the gun plead guilty (to the gun violation and drug charges) and served his sentence. While this doesn't address or compensate for the loss of a wonderful person like Venessa... it would be an injustice to try to punish Hunter for Talavic's crimes. We just don't do that type of vicarious punishment.

Hunter made a mistake which he was punished for. We can debate if that punishment was appropriate but we can't transfer what Talavic ultimatly did too another to pay the price for Talovic's decisions.

Think about it... If he didn't have the 38 special he got in this transaction... would he not have just used one of the other weapons he had with him at the time? And then would THAT person be punished for how Talavic used the weapon he got from them?

Are we saying if he had choosen to use the shotgun (as he did with several other victims)... Everything would have been fine? I don't think so, but the outcome would have been the same.

an adult did a crime an never served the time he served 15months for drug charge nothing for selling the gun how is that right