Chris Huhne to be charged for perverting the course of justice
- Thread starter Dolph
- Start date
True, but that isn't why PCJ is punishable by up to life imprisonment. The offence was developed through the common law and has never been put on the statute books, so there's no maximum sentence specified in legislation. You can theoretically receive a life sentence for any common law offence.
Jury nullification justifies the use of juries. Reform occasionally needs to be forced on the legal system through a string of acquittals, and judges will never acquit a defendant who is technically guilty.
There's also something to be said for being able to put your case to someone other than a case-hardened old git who has spent his life inside the legal system.
Yes I expect many of the Lib Dems would enjoy picking up the soap in the communal showers in HM Prison. Enjoy!
It's just a pity Laws wasn't there to welcome him.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 1 Aug 2004
- Posts
- 12,681
- Location
- Tyneside
He will as the judge has to discount for the guilty plea but I will surprised if he doesn't get a custodial sentence.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 17 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 36,750
- Location
- Southampton, UK
Indeed, the judge has already warned this is likely.
I have an acquaintance who was charged and found guilty of a similar offence...(passing his points onto his partner and perverting the course of justice), similar issues and he had a far worse background criminally than Chris Huhne....he didn't admit a guilty plea however and he was convicted and sentenced to 2 years probation, a fine and 200 hour community service...he wasn't given, nor was there a suggestion of a custodial sentence....so I have to ask if a custodial sentence is passed down then is it to make an example of someone in the public arena and is that really justice?
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 17 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 36,750
- Location
- Southampton, UK
He was in a position of power and than changes things. It's like when Police Officers get convicted of perverting the course of justice (luckily quite rare) they get the book thrown at them, and rightly so.
However he did not use that power to escape the points, so he did not misuse his position to do so, if he had then you may have a point. Justice should be equal for all.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 1 Aug 2004
- Posts
- 12,681
- Location
- Tyneside
He's been very fortunate. Such a case is almost guaranteed to carry a custodial sentence.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 17 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 36,750
- Location
- Southampton, UK
The problem is that if he's willing to pervert the course of justice, what's to say that he's not just as willing to abuse his power? One of the function of sentences is to deter.
So he is (extra) guilty simply because he may have the opportunity to do something worse?
Hmmm.
So justice depends on the opportunity and exposure of the individual (as in he might do something worse, and he can be used as a deterrent to others because he is well known) and not on the crime the individual is guilty of committing.
It's not my idea of equal and balanced justice I'm afraid. I understand the situation however, I just wish it was more equal in how it is meted out.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
A custodial sentence is made up of 'punishment' for the crime AND the perceived danger to the public. It's not about being 'extra guilty' as you put it.
What do you think a parole boards job is? It is to analyse an inmate and decide if that person is safe to let out they aren't deciding if the person has served enough time for the crime they originally committed.
Our justice system has always worked like this, and that rule doesn't just apply to violent criminals.
In Huhne's case, he's lost all his power and never work in government again so I'm not sure there is any extra danger.
It isn't about being convicted for or considered he might commit another unrelated crime however....a person is judged on the crimes he has actually committed, not on ones that he might commit. In this example the reason put forth why Chris Huhne should be given a harsher sentence is because he was in a position of power, however he wasn't in a position of power when the crime took place, neither was his subsequent position of power related to his crime in any way, therefore he should be sentences according to the crime he committed, not sentenced for the crime he committed and a crime he did not commit.
I understand what Parole is and how it works. If one feel that Chris Huhne is likely to avoid more points in a similar fashion then they can refuse to release him before his sentence is served, however it would be highly unfair if they refused it simply because he 'might' or is 'capable' of commiting a crime he did not commit in the first instance, such as a abusing his position of power.
I understand that our Justice System has its flaws, although it has always convicted people for a crime they are accused of rather than including ones they might possibly be capable of.
His work in Govt is unrelated to his criminal offence.