Muslim girl gang escape jail after judge hears 'they weren't used to drinking because of their relig

Isn't that for the jury to decide.

There is proof of threats to kill, proof of racial aggravation, proof of carrying out deliberate acts which are likely to endanger life or to kill.
 
dirtydog said:
Isn't that for the jury to decide.
Click to expand...

The judge will give the jury guidance. The circumstances are such that they probably weren't even asked to consider attempted murder. I doubt the prosecution even considered it.

To get attempted murder, you would need overwhelming and conclusive evidence of the desire to murder, such as emails, recorded phone calls, written notes etc from prior to the attack detailing the plan, and within these, express mentioning of death. Only then could you be beyond reasonable doubt that there really was an intention to kill. It's why it's very rare to get convicted of it.
 
There must be more to the story than that, like certain mitigating circumstances... though I do find it hard to believe that no jail time is being given. Though at £25k per person per year to put them in jail I wonder if some form of community service, public humiliation and/or compensation to the victim is potentially a better punishment?

I don't particularly worry about the words used or the religions as it is for me the least vile of the acts - kicking the crap out of someone in an unprovoked act is disgusting. I don't particularly think this was a racially motivated attack as she was white, and who knows, might have been a woman of easy virtue! Jocularity aside however, I have to concede that were it reversed (i.e. white people kicking an ethnic minority and yelling "black ****") then the outcome would undoubtedly be different, though it shouldn't be.

Troubling. :( Sad to see such behaviour - I wonder how much remorse they have...
 
While I agree there is no way anybody can know the full intention - I have to agree that saying "kill X person" along with kicking somebody in the head while they are on the ground should result in a more serious conviction.

A situation like that could have easily escalated by the language used, for example - the victims partner may have used a weapon believing the fight had become a literal fight for the life of his girlfriend - inaction could have resulted in her death (from his perspective) - which is also another fact, they "could" have killed her.

The people in question require rehabilitation to a degree & I do agree the severity of the situation is being downplayed somewhat.

I'd feel the same regardless of if it was white on white, it's the language used & the actual violence acted out (totally ignoring the racial element).

Let's put it this way,

If a group of people attack person A - one of them says "Kill person A" - would person A legally be entitled to use deadly force - obviously not excessive or chasing them or anything (if required) in self defence?.
 
Last edited:
Nitefly said:
The judge will give the jury guidance. The circumstances are such that they probably weren't even asked to consider attempted murder. I doubt the prosecution even considered it.

To get attempted murder, you would need overwhelming and conclusive evidence of the desire to murder, such as emails, recorded phone calls, written notes etc from prior to the attack detailing the plan, and within these, express mentioning of death. Only then could you be beyond reasonable doubt that there really was an intention to kill. It's why it's very rare to get convicted of it.
Click to expand...

Yes I already know that; we are talking hypothetically.

I already said that the prosecution chose a lesser charge in order to get a conviction which is understandable because the bar is lower.
 
Freefaller said:
There must be more to the story than that, like certain mitigating circumstances... though I do find it hard to believe that no jail time is being given. Though at £25k per person per year to put them in jail I wonder if some form of community service, public humiliation and/or compensation to the victim is potentially a better punishment?
Click to expand...

Cost of imprisonment should never come into sentencing decisions. It should be about what society demands and what the perpetrators deserve.

I should think these 'women' are heroes in their 'community' both for carrying out the attack and for getting away with it.
 
Nitefly said:
Come on Robbo, you are sharper than this!

Fot a crime you need a 'mens rea', the mental element of the crime, which is intending to kill someone for attempted murder. This is almost impossible to prove - how can you say beyond reasonable doubt that they were trying to kill her? Saying 'kill her' is not always a literal meaning of the words and kicking someone in the head isn't proof of this either (has there actually been any details of injuries to the head other than some hair pulled out?).
Click to expand...

While you are no doubt right from a legal perspective, I think that it's quite clear what their intentions were, but that may be difficult to prove (though it shouldn't be - which is troubling).
 
They were heard saying they wanted to "kill the white ****", and were kicking in the head?

How was that not attempted murder? Not to mention clearly racially aggravated. If I gave a chap a kicking and referred to his colour in my insults, I'd be in jail already.
 
Right.

Lets get more facts before we go spouting off.

For a start..... all the reports are calling it a "Girl-gang" attack are typical media hype...... Firstly - they are not girls - they are all grown women, two 28 years old, and two 24.

I'm now going to see if I can find the case transcripts to see what really happened and what was really said....
 
dirtydog said:
Yes, lesser. It means shaving a small percentage off the jail term, it doesn't mean letting them get off scott free.
Click to expand...
I imagine it was one of several factors taken into account.

Robbo said:
While you are no doubt right from a legal perspective, I think that it's quite clear what their intentions were, but that may be difficult to prove (though it shouldn't be - which is troubling).
Click to expand...
Attempted murder is very hard to establish as it's a very damning thing to be committed of. Let's for example say I went out into town and started drinking and got aggressive at a man after he insulted my friend. I announce that if he didn't stop I'd "knock off his head". He continues and I announce "right, you're dead" and strike him in the face and kick him in the head when he's on the floor.

Assuming he received some flesh wounds, how would it be appropriate to lock somebody away for attempted murder in that circumstance? If it were easier to do so, then I might be convicted for attempted murder when I actually intended to 'merely' injure him.
 
Neil79 said:
Shall I be Muslim Get out of Jail free card or Polish lots of work for me

?
Click to expand...

I think you would have to also get a skin change to black for that to work.

......

*Converts to Islam, off to go bash some skulls in with my get of of jail free card :D

Oh wait, I haz to be a wimmin too ......

Will have to see the docs for a sex change.
 
dirtydog said:
Cost of imprisonment should never come into sentencing decisions. It should be about what society demands and what the perpetrators deserve.

I should think these 'women' are heroes in their 'community' both for carrying out the attack and for getting away with it.
Click to expand...

Oh I agree cost shouldn't come into it, but sometimes you have to think whether or not locking up a motorist that did 71 mph on the motorway (I'm being flippant I know) is more serious and worthy than a bunch of people kicking the daylights out of each other.

Why are these women heroes? Where does it say that? I don't think anyone would condone their actions?
 
Freefaller said:
Oh I agree cost shouldn't come into it, but sometimes you have to think whether or not locking up a motorist that did 71 mph on the motorway (I'm being flippant I know) is more serious and worthy than a bunch of people kicking the daylights out of each other.
Click to expand...
Not sure I understand your point there ;) Better to give some real world examples. I think that if you commit a crime deemed worthy of prison then you go to prison. Do we really want a California type situation where people get sentenced to six months but get out after half an hour because the jails are full.

Why are these women heroes? Where does it say that? I don't think anyone would condone their actions?
Click to expand...
Those who are racist towards whites would. And there are a LOT of people in this country who are racist *and violent* towards whites because of their race.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom