What is the Justice rationale behind this court's decision? Teenager avoids jail after raping a 5 ye

randal said:
I don't think it's a matter of the upper ceiling of punishment, the law allows for ample punishment. The problem is sentencing guidelines not being followed or understood.
Click to expand...

Surely that's a pretty basic and fundamental part of being a judge?
 
Dis86 said:
Surely that's a pretty basic and fundamental part of being a judge?
Click to expand...

Yep, but they still have guidelines to follow. There was an article out recently, might have even been this week discussing it. Long story short, the sentencing guidelines in the UK are a total mess. Confusing and contradictory, and in definite need of updating.

I wager this would be one hell of a task subject to intense scrutiny and little thanks, which the cynical part of me thinks is why nobody has picked it up.
 
I truly despair. What's worse is my own apathy towards both this and other cretinous acts and decisions by and for and of humanity. Thank goodness I’m childless and own my own four walls to hide behind.
 
Single offence of rape by single offender: 5 years custody - victim 16 or over
8 years custody - victim 13 or over but under 16
10 years custody - victim under 13
Click to expand...

CPS states 10yrs

So why bother with guidelines if some senile judge knows better.

****** up world :mad:
 
Kenai said:
Logic fail.

Why would a more extreme punishment option make any difference when the apparent problem is he's been given the minimum possible?
Click to expand...

Because back then people who committed atrocious crimes such as this, were actually punished, severely. Not pussy foot about like they do now with this liberal bull**** and let people literally just walk away... the justice system now compared to then is a joke.
 
mrdbristol said:
CPS states 10yrs

So why bother with guidelines if some senile judge knows better.

****** up world :mad:
Click to expand...

Isn't it just. There must have been some "justification" derived from something in this lot:

When reviewing a case, in which a youth under 18 is alleged to have committed an offence contrary to sections 5 to 8, prosecutors should obtain and consider:

  • the views of local authority Childrens and Young Peoples Service;
  • any risk assessment or report conducted by the local authority or youth offending service in respect of sexually harmful behaviour ( such as AIM (Assessment, Intervention and Moving On);
  • background information and history of the parties ;
  • the views of the families of all parties.
  • Careful regard should be paid to the following factors:
  • the relative ages of the parties;
  • the existence of and nature of any relationship;
  • the sexual and emotional maturity of the parties and any emotional or physical effects as a result of the conduct;
  • whether the child under 13 in fact freely consented (even though in law this is not a defence) or a genuine mistake as to age was in fact made;
  • whether any element of seduction, breach of any duty of responsibility to the child or other exploitation is disclosed by the evidence;
  • the impact of a prosecution on each child involved.
Click to expand...
Don't take this as me defending the decision, far from it. Just trying to get an understanding of how a judge can be allowed to make such a grossly wrong decision and still keep his job.
 
SonniLombardi said:
Because back then people who committed atrocious crimes such as this, were actually punished, severely. Not pussy foot about like they do now with this liberal bull**** and let people literally just walk away... the justice system now compared to then is a joke.
Click to expand...

So when you wrote
SonniLombardi said:
This is why capital punishment should not have been abolished.
Click to expand...

You actually meant "I would like for it to be the 1960s".
 
SonniLombardi said:
Because back then people who committed atrocious crimes such as this, were actually punished, severely. Not pussy foot about like they do now with this liberal bull**** and let people literally just walk away... the justice system now compared to then is a joke.
Click to expand...

Or they were just ignored completely, like Saville and Co. So yeah, much better.
 
Caged said:
So when you wrote


You actually meant "I would like for it to be the 1960s".
Click to expand...

No, I like it being 2015. I just would prefer the justice system from that era being reintroduced into this era to some extent.

Kenai said:
Or they were just ignored completely, like Saville and Co. So yeah, much better.
Click to expand...

At the end of the day, the fundamental issue here is that this person was improperly punished and wasn't given what he deserved for his crime.
 
Last edited:
First. He should have his tiny little prawn **** removed. Then he should be sent to prison for 35 Years - Life. Specifically put in a cell with Big reg and Raymond the *******. When he comes out of prison he should be forced into slavery upon the victims choice of who will be his master. Oh and if nobody wants him he should be raped every day for the rest of his dirty ********* life. ****
 
SonniLombardi said:
At the end of the day, the fundamental issue here is that this person was improperly punished and wasn't given what he deserved for his crime.
Click to expand...

Exactly, so having even more extreme punishment would make no difference at all, which is what I said in the first place.
 
harry5522 said:
First. He should have his tiny little prawn **** removed. Then he should be sent to prison for 35 Years - Life. Specifically put in a cell with Big reg and Raymond the *******. When he comes out of prison he should be forced into slavery upon the victims choice of who will be his master. Oh and if nobody wants him he should be raped every day for the rest of his dirty ********* life. ****
Click to expand...

"Harry darling, your fish fingers are ready!"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom