howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#1
i normally log on to the "kent online" website each morning to catch up with local news.
every day there seems to be a conviction for a particularly nasty crime and what looks to me like a very light sentence.
i won't go into the details of them all, the last one i read was fo an 18 year old father to be that was charged with 3 counts of burglary and another 38 offences were owned up to.
he had 9 previous conviction for 11 different offences.
various victims were called to detail how the offences had impacted on their lives.
he was sentenced to 18 months youth custody!!
the judge then went on to say that he noted that the guilty one had kept his nose clean for a year and he had considered giving him a suspended sentence.
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#2
I think baz and I would agree on this one, that the legal system can be an ass
and needs reform
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
#3
The judge, clearly, should have had the strength of his/her own convictions and suspended the sentence.
-18 yo. 'turned the corner'.
-9 previous for various. How difficult is it to get a 'conviction' of/on a child? And how thin the line between a ticking-off and prosecution?
Plus. Even though his time may only be a year inside he will be inside with other less reformed, less hopeful and more ambitious and less self-regarding peers. His first child (remember that in your own life?) shall be born into a far more difficult and stressful situation than could have been and need have been the case.
Let's face it the 'public' were still not satisfied as it is.
What joy there is to be had too that no mention has been made of any 'crime against the person'.
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Guest 675- Registered: 30 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,610
#4
There is a tendency towards 'knee-jerk' reactions towards sentencing that will never work in all cases.
One is to consider the effects on the perpetrator of incarceration while the other is to assume all criminals should be locked up forever. Both sides place the problem on 'society' and the effects the person will have on it. The most important consideration is too often forgotten and that is the victims.
Before any concern about the possible effects of punishment on the guilty are raised consideration should be given to the effects the crime has had on the victims of that crime. What can sometimes be presented in court as 'a prank gone wrong' or a 'misguided act on the spur of the moment' has the potential to wreck lives, destroy relationships and leave permanent scares on the victims.
"I might have turned over a few houses but I've also knocked-up my girlfriend" is not an excuse and should never be taken as one. Custodial sentences are not always the answer but suspended sentences seldom are. A guilty verdict owes it to the victims to punish the guilty and community service goes a long way towards showing the guilty that they need to work at repairing the damage they do.
Politics, it seems to me, for years, or all too long, has been concerned with right or left instead of right or wrong.
Richard Armour
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
#5
'community service', I'll go along with that, particularly in this instance.
Victims?
What of future victims? What's done is done; however horrific there is no getting away from that fact. Why the need for retribution to trump rehabitulation though?
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Guest 675- Registered: 30 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,610
#6
Is it 'retribution' to consider punishment that allows the victims peace of mind and 'rehabilitation' ?
Politics, it seems to me, for years, or all too long, has been concerned with right or left instead of right or wrong.
Richard Armour
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#7
gettng back to the "herbert" in question, the best part of 50 offences is hardly a youthful aberration.
there is always the add on that the longer he is incarcerated the less houses he can burgle and the less lives affected.
Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,931
#8
I have always thought that the victim should decide on the punishment with the judge acting as mediator when they get it wrong.
Did anyone watch the late night programme about the young reckless and dangerous drivers late last night, what a bunch of idiots.
In the case Howard mentions how do we know the lad had not committed more crimes in the last year but had not been caught.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Guest 645- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 4,463
#9
I don't want to sound too much like the lefty I am but it has been known for offenders to ' cough up' to crimes they never committed in order to reduce the crimie and convictions staistics in return for a quiet word by the law into the Magistrate or Judges shell like for a lighter sentence.
Marek
I think therefore I am (not a Tory supporter)
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#10
i thought that too jan i was giving him the benefit of the doubt.
the police charged him with 3 and he put his hand up to another 38, presumably they must have been in the year that he was good.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#11
we do need to look into the legl system
the only time i want the use of solicitors barryw lol
)
although prison is not the answer all the time, and our prisons are over crowded
we need to find some answers soon
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
