Disgusting failure of the law

[Lako42]

http://www.thisisleicestershire.co....an-Leicester/story-13282204-detail/story.html

 

[FryattFox]

On the face of it it looks completely unfair. In the context of the current looters being jailed, I'd much rather see people like this **** serve time in jail than someone who's committed theft.

 

[Ike O'Noclassed]

If only he'd nicked the burger or even better a Krispy Kreme Doughnut, he'd have been banged up for years.

 

[Kingy_85]

I'd find the bloke and break HIS jaw. Simple.

 

[Macky]

Four years for a drunken, tasteless joke on facebook compared to this shows just how ****ed up the justice system is

 

[Leesoh]

Yet again, another knee-jerk reaction without knowing the full facts, in this case, of what was said in the Sentencing hearing, and more importantly, what wasn't said in the hearing. For example, was there a pre-sentence report, and what were the contents of that? Was this a guilty plea, or had the matter gone to trial, which would affect the sentencing?

I note that the judge's reasons for passing that sentence are not contained within the report. Judge's are under a duty to give their reasons. The report doesn't even name the judge in question!

Reading the Sentencing Guidelines, I can only assume that the offence was considered a Category 3 level offence, in which case, he's got the maximum prison sentence. Suspending it is not as unusual as people think. However, I would prefer to read the reasoning behind the sentence, rather than the reactions of an understandably angry/upset victim or relative.

I have said it before, and I shall say it again, if you have any issues with the Criminal Justice System, go and see it in action. Try and make the time to see sentencing taking place, and get a fuller picture. Friday mornings are usually the best time for sentencing, but the Courtserve website gives listings for Crown Courts in England and Wales.

 

[H T B]

Yet again, somebody jumps in to defend "their Trade".

How can you possibly justify this lout not ending up behind bars?
If it was bloke on bloke, there may be a bit of grey area, but a bloke on a women.
Sorry, but he should be behind bars. Show some remorse behind there and I might agree with his repenting.

 

[Lako42]

Yet again, another knee-jerk reaction without knowing the full facts, in this case, of what was said in the Sentencing hearing, and more importantly, what wasn't said in the hearing. For example, was there a pre-sentence report, and what were the contents of that? Was this a guilty plea, or had the matter gone to trial, which would affect the sentencing?

I note that the judge's reasons for passing that sentence are not contained within the report. Judge's are under a duty to give their reasons. The report doesn't even name the judge in question!

Reading the Sentencing Guidelines, I can only assume that the offence was considered a Category 3 level offence, in which case, he's got the maximum prison sentence. Suspending it is not as unusual as people think. However, I would prefer to read the reasoning behind the sentence, rather than the reactions of an understandably angry/upset victim or relative.

I have said it before, and I shall say it again, if you have any issues with the Criminal Justice System, go and see it in action. Try and make the time to see sentencing taking place, and get a fuller picture. Friday mornings are usually the best time for sentencing, but the Courtserve website gives listings for Crown Courts in England and Wales.

This is all very lovely, however I have absolutely no respect or faith in a legal system that allows someone to repeatedly punch a woman in the face in public resulting in a fractures jaw without sending them away. A suspended sentence may not be that uncommon, in this case that is the problem.

I bet the lad who did it is in as much shock as anyone else should be.

 

[Macky]

Yet again, another knee-jerk reaction without knowing the full facts

My comment was aimed more at the absurd sentence handed down to the arsehole that made a drunken joke on facebook, rather than this case.
I don't doubt that this does fall within the sentencing guidelines, but that just highlights the indefensible sentences handed out recently after the riots which was more to do with playing to the baying mob than delivering justice

 

[Leesoh]

Yet again, somebody jumps in to defend "their Trade".

How can you possibly justify this lout not ending up behind bars?
If it was bloke on bloke, there may be a bit of grey area, but a bloke on a women.
Sorry, but he should be behind bars. Show some remorse behind there and I might agree with his repenting.

I don't know if you've read my post, and digested it properly, but I haven't justified anything. I am not in possession of all of the facts etc to form the opinion that it is or is not justified.

This is all very lovely, however I have absolutely no respect or faith in a legal system that allows someone to repeatedly punch a woman in the face in public resulting in a fractures jaw without sending them away. A suspended sentence may not be that uncommon, in this case that is the problem.

I bet the lad who did it is in as much shock as anyone else should be.

The Sentencing Guidelines were reviewed and changed this year, for your information.

Seeing as people are comparing one situation with a totally unrelated situation, My comment was aimed more at the absurd sentence handed down to the arsehole that made a drunken joke on facebook, rather than this case.
I don't doubt that this does fall within the sentencing guidelines, but that just highlights the indefensible sentences handed out recently after the riots which was more to do with playing to the baying mob than delivering justice[/QUOTE]

The way the riots have been dealt with is totally unprecedented, and I would argue, questionable. Considering these types of offences would have taken a couple of months to go through the system if committed in isolation, processing them within days leaves some cases open to mistakes.

As for the sentences themselves, I've read reports and comments suggesting that judges have been "setting an example", and hiding behind policy to give disproportionate sentences. And don't get me started on magistrates....

 

[Rich B]

Yet again, another knee-jerk reaction without knowing the full facts, in this case, of what was said in the Sentencing hearing, and more importantly, what wasn't said in the hearing. For example, was there a pre-sentence report, and what were the contents of that? Was this a guilty plea, or had the matter gone to trial, which would affect the sentencing?

I note that the judge's reasons for passing that sentence are not contained within the report. Judge's are under a duty to give their reasons. The report doesn't even name the judge in question!

Reading the Sentencing Guidelines, I can only assume that the offence was considered a Category 3 level offence, in which case, he's got the maximum prison sentence. Suspending it is not as unusual as people think. However, I would prefer to read the reasoning behind the sentence, rather than the reactions of an understandably angry/upset victim or relative.

I have said it before, and I shall say it again, if you have any issues with the Criminal Justice System, go and see it in action. Try and make the time to see sentencing taking place, and get a fuller picture. Friday mornings are usually the best time for sentencing, but the Courtserve website gives listings for Crown Courts in England and Wales.

No excuse whatsoever, jail him and make an example

 

[bocadillo]

Yet again, somebody jumps in to defend "their Trade".

How can you possibly justify this lout not ending up behind bars?.

On the evidence of what we are told in the report, it looks as though he got away lightly. But the judge will have heard much more than this; and I am sure there is much more to it. Other than the fact that he was remorseful, we know nothing about any plea in mitigation that might have been made.

One thing that seems odd to me is that after the woman had had the burger thrown at her, after she had been punched three times, she remained in the same place as the bloke and "asked him his name with a view to reporting him". Now if the same thing had happened to me, I would be making sure that there was the greatest distance possible between me and the person who had just attacked me. With the attacker apparently in the burger bar and not trying to make good an escape, I would be dialling 999 to get the police there rather than putting myself in further danger. Yes - odd - and more to the case than we have had from a very one-sided report.

Let's see if the DPP appeals the sentence. If he doesn't, we have to presume that he thinks it's within the right range for the offence.

 

[Steven]

Let's see if the DPP appeals the sentence. If he doesn't, we have to presume that he thinks it's within the right range for the offence.

For, against, to?

 

[Blue Maniac]

For, against, to?

Yer wot?

 

[bocadillo]

For, against, to?

I'm sorry. I don't understand the question.

 

[Steven]

Yer wot?

Appeal for, appeal against, appeal to?

 

[SwedeFox]

Thank you, Leesoh, for being one of TB's most sensible posters. It warms my heart.

Is there not a way to read indictments and judgements online? That would be great for transparency and people could make up their own mind. www.icty.org is great for that but clearly there's a bit of a difference there as they are former politicians or generals indicted for genocide and not drunks who smashed women up at McDonalds (although who knows what Mladić was up to during those years he went missing).

I hate Daily Mail with a passion by the way.

 

[bocadillo]

Appeal for, appeal against, appeal to?

You're a bright boy. See if you can guess.

 

[Leesoh]

Thank you, Leesoh, for being one of TB's most sensible posters. It warms my heart.

Is there not a way to read indictments and judgements online? That would be great for transparency and people could make up their own mind. www.icty.org is great for that but clearly there's a bit of a difference there as they are former politicians or generals indicted for genocide and not drunks who smashed women up at McDonalds (although who knows what Mladić was up to during those years he went missing).

I hate Daily Mail with a passion by the way.

Thank you

Most day to day stuff never really sees the light of day. It is possible to get transcripts, for a fee. There are some subscriber only websites, and http://www.bailii.org/form/search_cases.html reports some cases, but these are usually appeals etc. It means having to rely on reports in the local paper, which can be selective in what is printed.

I was actually expecting someone to say that incidents like this further the case for cameras in court, something that I'm not very keen on, believe it or not.

 

[The Major]

I hate Daily Mail with a passion by the way.

I hate beetroot too. What's that got to do with this?