Could you sign this petition please?

This was being shared on facebook the other day, I didn't watch the video as the description of what they did was bad enough :(
 
while I think they're scumbags and deserved a tougher sentence I also disagree with the petition

sentences shouldn't be reviewed just because a particular case has got some attention and the general public is outraged at the specific result of that specific case - that isn't how the justice system should work... it isn't a popularity contest where people deemed to have done bad things in stories that get spread online get tougher sentences thanks to a petition

a more general petition for greater funding to our prison service, more emphasis on rehabilitation in the first instance and tougher sentences for repeat offenders is perhaps something I'd support
 
dowie said:
while I think they're scumbags and deserved a tougher sentence I also disagree with the petition

sentences shouldn't be reviewed just because a particular case has got some attention and the general public is outraged at the specific result of that specific case - that isn't how the justice system should work... it isn't a popularity contest where people deemed to have done bad things in stories that get spread online get tougher sentences thanks to a petition

a more general petition for greater funding to our prison service, more emphasis on rehabilitation in the first instance and tougher sentences for repeat offenders is perhaps something I'd support
Click to expand...

Of course there are problems with the justice system, but this act was sick and evil and the fact is the sentence was nowhere near sufficient. If you want to start a petition about the issues you raise, then away you go, but I think the response from GD validates my argument somewhat. This is a separate issue.
 
dowie said:
while I think they're scumbags and deserved a tougher sentence I also disagree with the petition

sentences shouldn't be reviewed just because a particular case has got some attention and the general public is outraged at the specific result of that specific case - that isn't how the justice system should work... it isn't a popularity contest where people deemed to have done bad things in stories that get spread online get tougher sentences thanks to a petition

a more general petition for greater funding to our prison service, more emphasis on rehabilitation in the first instance and tougher sentences for repeat offenders is perhaps something I'd support
Click to expand...

Dear God. I might actually agree with something you've posted.

robfosters said:
Of course there are problems with the justice system, but this act was sick and evil and the fact is the sentence was nowhere near sufficient. If you want to start a petition about the issues you raise, then away you go, but I think the response from GD validates my argument somewhat. This is a separate issue.
Click to expand...

I'll be honest, I've seen worse offenders get less. This is the reality of the justice system and although this case is also distressing, it's also very unlikely to be changed.
 
robfosters said:
Of course there are problems with the justice system, but this act was sick and evil and the fact is the sentence was nowhere near sufficient. If you want to start a petition about the issues you raise, then away you go, but I think the response from GD validates my argument somewhat. This is a separate issue.
Click to expand...

the response doesn't validate anything

I think lots of people would agree that people like that should be punished more severely, increasing sentences for specific cases on the basis of popularity isn't how the justice system is supposed to work

Burnsy2023 said:
Dear God. I might actually agree with something you've posted.
Click to expand...

:confused: aside from your prediction thread I don't recally you openly disagreeing with much I've posted in GD
 
dowie said:
the response doesn't validate anything

I think lots of people would agree that people like that should be punished more severely, increasing sentences for specific cases on the basis of popularity isn't how the justice system is supposed to work
Click to expand...

But there are rules by which the sentence can be reviewed and lengthened or shortened if there is strong enough public support for it.
 
dowie said:
Can you be more specific, I am curious?
Click to expand...

http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/s_to_u/unduly_lenient_sentences/

Home*»*Prosecution Policy and Guidance*»*Legal Guidance*»*S to U*» Unduly lenient sentences

Unduly Lenient SentencesPower to referResponsibility of CCPTimeliness"56-Day Slip Rule"How referrals ariseHow the decision is madeOffences subject to reviewSentences subject to reviewMultiple sentencesDeferred sentencesMeaning of 'unduly lenient'Double jeopardyThe referralRequired documentationAbridged reportFull reportCCP authorisationAdvice on sentenceIndictments and TICsBasis of pleaCase summariesTranscriptsSentence indicationsPlea and sentence document (PSD)Pre-sentence and other reportsMitigationStatements and exhibitsAfter the referralResponding to interested partiesHandling media enquiriesAnnexes

*

Power to refer

Sections 35 and 36 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 empower the Law Officers to apply to the Court of Appeal for leave to refer for review any sentence which:

was passed in respect of an offence to which Part IV of the Act applies;was passed in a proceeding in the Crown Court; andappears to be unduly lenientResponsibility of CCP

Every CCP is required by the Director to take personal responsibility for ensuring that all unduly lenient sentencing (ULS) submissions made by their Area are of the highest quality and submitted expeditiously.

Top of page

A referral to the Court of Appeal must be made within 28 days of the date of sentence (Paragraph 1, Schedule 3).

The 28 day time limit is absolute. There is no power to extend the time limit or to apply for leave to refer out-of-time.

The period is calculated from the day following the sentence, so it will end on the same day of the week, four weeks later. Where there is likely to be a submission close to the end of the time limit, the ULS Team in the Appeals Unit of the Special Crime and Counter Terrorism Division*and Attorney General's Office (AGO) should be contacted at the earliest opportunity.

When submitting papers to the ULS Team and AGO, it is important for Areas to consider public and non-working days, particularly over the Christmas and Easter period.

Please ensure that if the case has missed the time limit, or is not referable, a short note should be submitted to the AGO only - which needs to provide sufficient information for a letter to be drafted by the AGO to the interested party.

If the CPS does not consider a sentence to be unduly lenient, any interested party must be told immediately that they can request the Attorney General to consider the case within the 28-day overall time limit.

The time limit must be emphasised and all CPS actions taken suitably expeditiously.

Top of page

"56-Day Slip Rule"

The Crown Court has the power to alter a sentence or other order made by the Crown Court within 56 days of the date on which it was made (Section 155 Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000, as amended by section 47 and schedule 8 paragraph 28 Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008).

The ULS regime should not be used when it is more appropriate to apply the 56-day slip rule to correct an unlawful sentence, for example, when a mandatory order has been omitted or a mandatory minimum sentence or term has not been applied.

However, in such cases, CPS Areas should ensure that the court addresses the error under the slip rule well within 28 days of sentence because of the need to remain within the absolute time limit for a referral to be made (See*Timeliness*above).

In such circumstances, Areas should contact the ULS Team and the AGO at an early stage to discuss and agree the approach.

If the sentence is correct in law then the proper approach is to consider referring the case as an unduly lenient sentence.

Top of page

Unduly lenient sentence referrals can arise in a number of ways:

Areas may consider the sentence unduly lenient;interested parties including victims or the bereaved may contact the CPS;media coverage may prompt the Area to consider the case;the Attorney General may also be contacted directly, by MPs, peers, pressure groups or members of the public, or may respond to media coverage. In those cases, the AGO will request papers from the Area with casework responsibility for the case.
Click to expand...

https://www.gov.uk/complain-about-low-crown-court-sentence
 
Sentences don't seem too far off, to be honest. Was a dog after all.

I'll not be signing. Try to keep things tight with my support for petitions - they're already of fairly minimal impact without signing every slightly vexing issue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom