Dirty Winker!
- Thread starter Dis86
- Start date
To be honest, I saw that suspended sentence coming.
Keep a student paying is probably more to the point, given he'll be paying international fees.
They're probably also a little nervous about getting slapped back legally if they'd kicked him out, his visa made invalid etc. and then he was found not guilty or something, so we may yet see them take appropriate action now the sentencing has actually happened.
Money is a strong motivator though, so it will be entirely unsurprising to see nothing more done on their behalf.
Well this does not apply though, because he admitted he was in the wrong and pleaded guilty.
"Prosecutor Jennifer Coxon told the court that when Yadav was initially interviewed he made no reply but added: "He was re-interviewed and the DNA evidence was put to him. He admitted the offence, stating he was overcome with desire and he was aware that the gym cards were set up incorrectly, which allowed access to all rooms."
Yadav, 18, of Howard Street, Newcastle, admitted burglary with intent to cause criminal damage."
So no need to wait for sentencing, he's been guilty since pleading guilty.
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 22 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 28,816
- Location
- Boston, Lincolnshire
I wonder if she touched it with her hands to feel what it was.
Well, whatever their reasoning, it was the sentencing hearing they decided to wait for according to Miss Mellor, so we'll all just have to wait and see for when they decide to respond regarding whether they're prepared to give up his international student fees
Well, whatever their reasoning, it was the sentencing hearing they decided to wait for according to Miss Mellor, so we'll all just have to wait and see for when they decide to respond regarding whether they're prepared to give up his international student fees
Something needs to change, we should not be protecting offenders of this category.
Last edited:
I don't see any 'protection of offenders' happening here (yet), just a University delaying making a decision on something, possibly simply because they hoped the legal decision might make their decision for them...
Irrelevant when he had already been found guilty though. As I pointed out someone likely from that same university was expelled based purely on being charged of a sex crime.
I didn't say he won't be, just that he hasn't. As myself and Sid have pointed out, and you acknowledge, the crime he was convicted of should have been enough of a trigger. No need to wait for sentencing. His victim stands the chance of seeing him every day at uni.
What does any of that change? This is a sentencing hearing, he was found guilty of the crime some time ago and is still at that university. Why? Or do you find knocking one off in to a strangers bed and teddies acceptable?
All I seem to read these days is how pathetic the UK's justice system is
I saw this one earlier:
www.thetimes.com
We really are the laughing stock of the world.
All of these weak judges should be banned for life.
I saw this one earlier:
Rapist and murder suspect block extradition with ECHR claims
Judges ruled that extraditing the men to Brazil would risk inhuman treatment, prompting calls for reform of the UK’s use of human rights law
www.thetimes.com
We really are the laughing stock of the world.
All of these weak judges should be banned for life.
You misspelled "judges who follow the law". Human rights are Human rights; they're not "only Humans who are not total *******" rights - as they were drafted by British lawyers in the aftermath of WWII, passed into international law by general agreement shortly afterwards, and embedded into British domestic law in the Human Rights Act. It's not judges who get to decide whether or not he has human rights; that is the decision of various Governments and Parliaments that have come before.
Interpretations of the law.
Could someone explain in words of 1 syllable for me how extraditing a known criminal can cause torture, inhuman or degrading treatment, and punishment? It seems these judges are trolling surely. Did Brazil state they were going to torture him? I don't think so.All I seem to read these days is how pathetic the UK's justice system is
I saw this one earlier:
Rapist and murder suspect block extradition with ECHR claims
Judges ruled that extraditing the men to Brazil would risk inhuman treatment, prompting calls for reform of the UK’s use of human rights law
We really are the laughing stock of the world.
All of these weak judges should be banned for life.
Student burglar 'overcome with desire' snared by DNA on victim's teddies
Udkarsh Yadav broke into a fellow student's room in Gateshead while she was at home for Christmaswww.chroniclelive.co.uk
So just to be clear...breaks in to a lone female students room, thankfully she's not there, then decides to knock one out over her possessions.
At first pretends to be innocent, only admits it after hes presented with DNA evidence. Suspended sentence. Not deported. Not kicked out of uni.
I've mentioned the story on here before but a guy from my uni (quite possibly the same uni as this story) was kicked out for a later disproven accusation of rape whereby his accuser was actually charged.
Also MASSIVE safeguarding issue with the fact the access card system allowed access to any room.
Why are we so soft on crime?
When one of your very first comments is "not deported" it shows your true intensions for the thread.