topic Re: Sentencing after crimes. in The Round Table

Sentencing after crimes.

cee-dee — Fri, 27 May 2016 14:58:21 GMT

Sometimes, I think those sentencing criminals have lost touch with reality and I was prompted to post this thread by two cases in the news today.

First, a bloke who was chasing a car in a road-rage incident and crashed in to an innocent persons car causing two young sisters to be paralysed from the waist down for the rest of their lives was jailed for four and a half years.

Second, a bloke who made a hoax 999 call saying that a fellow copper was going to be kidnapped by terrorists was jailed for seven years.

I'm not saying the 7 year sentence was excessive, I'm saying that in comparison the 4½ year sentence for the car crash was woefully inadequate.

Right, over the the RT jury for comment?

Re: Sentencing after crimes.

artful_dodgings — Fri, 27 May 2016 17:53:00 GMT

If the law supposes that," said Mr. Bumble, squeezing his hat emphatically in both hands, "the law is a ass — an idiot.”

Charles Dickens. Oliver Twist.

Nothing's changed, has it ? I often wonder just which planet these 'learned' Judges are on. Certainly not this one. The late Kenny Everette had the best idea regarding Judges. Whenever he portrayed one, it was always as a croaking old decrepit, covered in dust and cobwebs, completely ga-ga, and out of touch with reality.

Enough said..

Re: Sentencing after crimes.

evoman3957 — Fri, 27 May 2016 18:51:29 GMT

If you really want to know what proper rehabilitation looks like.

Re: Sentencing after crimes.

cee-dee — Fri, 27 May 2016 20:00:02 GMT

You can guarantee that if such a final solution was in place, they'd descend like a ton of bricks on the weakest links and allow the hardest nuts to escape proper justice.

Re: Sentencing after crimes.

evoman3957 — Fri, 27 May 2016 20:06:12 GMT

The hardest nuts just take longer to crack, that's all.

Re: Sentencing after crimes.

023mjc — Fri, 27 May 2016 20:42:29 GMT

I couldn't agree more CD. If it had been that judges little girls it may have had a different outcome.

My step daughter is a detective, and she worked on a particularly harrowing case many years ago. Two blokes broke in to someones home. One ransacked the place and stole all the valuables, while the other raped a young girl. The **bleep** was vicious and he left her with lasting injuries. The robber was the one who stopped the attack in the end, saying thats not what we came here for. The robber got 7 years. The rapist got 5. Work that out.

Re: Sentencing after crimes.

023mjc — Fri, 27 May 2016 20:44:31 GMT

Well,the R word has been bleeped, but the bots obviously don't recognise it with ed or ist on the end.

Re: Sentencing after crimes.

fallen-archie — Fri, 27 May 2016 20:49:20 GMT

Yep once again CD has hit the nail on the head. Time for a real review of penalties based on the facts not availability.

Re: Sentencing after crimes.

margaret*e — Sat, 28 May 2016 07:34:10 GMT

Shocking to think the man that caused all that carnage was a driving instructor.

I've just been listening to a news article about this.

It was saying the sentence was because of some government law change, which means the maximum sentence is five years

Re: Sentencing after crimes.

plpmr — Sun, 29 May 2016 07:50:59 GMT

Yes, you are correct.

Previously he could have been charged with causing grievous bodily harm [GBH] and that, I think, carries a max of life.

Re: Sentencing after crimes.

cee-dee — Sun, 29 May 2016 08:38:44 GMT

Ever heard of Jean Monnet? No? I couldn't remember him either.

Anyway, this is what he once said :-

“Europe’s nations should be guided towards the superstate without their people understanding what is happening. This can be accomplished by successive steps, each disguised as having an economic purpose but which will irreversibly lead to federation.”

See? Like I said before, the Europeans couldn't defeat the British by war so they've decided to do it by stealth.

Re: Sentencing after crimes.

fallen-archie — Sun, 29 May 2016 09:21:29 GMT

I think we could all agree what sentence should be handed down to the Frenchy, if indeed that is the context you introduced it to your thread.

Re: Sentencing after crimes.

cee-dee — Sun, 29 May 2016 09:58:22 GMT

How odd, that post was supposed to be on the In-Out thread. It's playing up. Anyone else getting an error message on it?

Re: Sentencing after crimes.

fallen-archie — Sun, 29 May 2016 12:10:20 GMT

This is what I keep getting;

Your request failed. Please contact your system administrator and provide the date and time you received the error and this Exception ID: 19D0263C.
Click your browser's Back button to continue.

That happens when I try to go straight to a current page on a thread.

Re: Sentencing after crimes.

Anonymous — Sun, 29 May 2016 15:54:00 GMT

I think there should be fixed sentencing for certain crimes. What do you lot think would be fair?

Say for killing someone on purpose you get jailed for the rest of your life.

Say for killing someone in self defence, no jail.

Say for killing someone while driving under the influence of alcohol, 20 years.

Say for a rapists 30 years.

Robbing a house or a person, 5 years.

Hitting and hurting someone also 5 years

If you do both at the same time, 10 years

Hurting someone and making them disabled, jail for 30 years.

These are just some examples from the top of my head at this moment, so maybe need some more thought.

Re: Sentencing after crimes.

artful_dodgings — Sun, 29 May 2016 16:48:27 GMT

@023mjc wrote:
The robber was the one who stopped the attack in the end, saying thats not what we came here for. The robber got 7 years. The rapist got 5. Work that out.

Initially, probably an edict from the Brains of Brussels. That's the sort of thing they're good at over there.

@Dirty Harry @ post #15.

Nowhere near harsh enough, by a long chalk. Are you the successor to Shami Chakrabarti perchance ? *insert uncontrollable snickering here*

Re: Sentencing after crimes.

Anonymous — Sun, 29 May 2016 17:02:27 GMT

Who is that?

As I said, more thought might have to go into it.

So what do you suggest?

Re: Sentencing after crimes.

astrologica — Sun, 29 May 2016 17:54:44 GMT

For killing someone on purpose....a short length of rope.

Re: Sentencing after crimes.

evoman3957 — Mon, 30 May 2016 19:25:54 GMT

Abandon the concept of justice, because it's never achieved & is always the same, or less, in severity; as the crime that's been committed.

Replace it with retribution, so that the punishment is at least as great in severity; as the crime itself..........and then add a bit more.

1. Crimes involving money........make sure it doesn't pay.......1 year for every £1000 and seize culprits assets.

2. Crimes involving bodily harm.......5 years for every month it takes the victim to recover.

3. Crimes where the victim is permanently affected, mentally of physically..........life ( so the criminal is permanently affected also ).

4. Crimes of murder.........Death.

For the " Do- Gooders " who would treat scum bags with kid gloves............Life Imprisonment ( get them out of society, so the rest of us can get it cleaned up ).

Re: Sentencing after crimes.

fallen-archie — Mon, 30 May 2016 19:36:43 GMT

Seems like a plan!