Discussion in 'Speaker's Corner' started by johnloo, May 16, 2017.
No, it isn't. Go educate yourself.
Yes it is. They're the facts as put before the judge.
Jesus wept.....Nothing else a judge takes into consideration when sentencing?
Let me guess she's white?
Not sure if being sarcastic or you're insane. Russell Brand has the cognitive abilities of a plastic carrot. I mean, I'll agree with your point, but I can't think of a worse example for it.
"Stabbing" could be anything from a slight scratch to severing the femoral artery. It could involve anything from a pen knife to a carpenter's screw drive buried up to the hilt in the victim. So even if you google out some other case of "stabbing" there's no guarantee that the two will be comparable. In fact, there's a very good chance they wont be.
I'm assuming that some common sense could be applied...
If anything case two should have received a longer sentence (custodial) given that she apparently attacked after the initial fight between the two men.
But yes, we don't know if she was pregnant (hence the suspended sentence) or was a first time offender etc while the guy from case one may have already been convicted of something previously.
As for this case, she should have gone to prison..
I know actually what the judge had to take into consideration, no she wasn't beaten by her husband, no she wasn't abused by anyone, no she wasn't pregnant, was she having an affair with someone who was 20 years younger than her, yes. Did she have previous, yes for attacking another lady. Was there any reason for her to get involved, no.
Dowie in sensible post shocker
Even so, as much as I hate the guy, I've still heard him in interviews make some pretty sensible and perceptive remarks... He usually spoils it straight after with his idiotic humour, as if he doesn't want people to know he can actually be a smart, rational human being instead of a complete *** all the time...!
Do women still get to use PMT as a defence? I know that used to be a thing at one point...
That's a bad assumption. You're currently searching online (or rather demanding others do so) for cases of "stabbing" but anyone with any first hand experience of the press or even just general awareness is that the first thing that happens when a news outlet gets hold of a story is to phrase things as dramatically as possible. Really, to make the sort of argument you want to make, you're going to have to find actual detailed reports on cases and even then one or two samples wont make a case for you.
I only need one case
LOL, thanks, I guess
Not to prove anything that people wouldn't agree with anyway. One case in a sea of all those out there will prove only that there can be differences between two cases. A conclusion that everybody else here will shrug and say "We know that." In order to prove there is any kind of general difference, you'd need one Hell of a lot more than two cases.
To review: You're equating anything that says "stabbing" despite the massive range that can cover, you're suggesting that newspaper story level coverage is sufficient to compare cases despite the systemic click-bait nature of modern news coverage, you're trying to draw general and sweeping conclusions from two cases out of a huge number (and one of those cases you have yet to find so all of this is hypothetical). And to round it all out you keep putting the burden of proof on others by instructing them to go and find such a case for you.
Good luck with that!
no I only need one case - I made a statement to the effect that this wouldn't happen if the genders were reversed... if there is a counter to that then I change my opinion. That only requires one case. I'll also note that I'm hardly the only person in this thread to have expressed that opinion.
I'm not putting the burden of proof on others, I have however stated to people who've presented some case that doesn't involve stabbing that that is what I'd be interested in.
This one's hilarious because a) I had to check she wasn't a distant relation and b) I was involved in a similar fracas once upon a time. Fortunately, I'd managed to break the assailant's delicate wrist with my thick scholarly skull and instead of a court case much hilarity ensued.
But let me just drop these here:
The legal viewpoint:
@dowie - see if the Cricket Bat Case rocks your boat.
The media view:
The short of it: the sentencing - which is not yet final - would not be unusual, though a final suspended sentence would not be unusual either; however, the bias in our justice system is also real - if you look, act and sound like the judge or his daughter, your odds of getting him to compute along the mercy lines of mitigating circumstances increase. Though as the Indy points out, the bigger problem may be that overall we have a huge sentimental hard-on for the punishment aspect of prison, which is often economically damaging and not as socially corrective as vestigial moralistic dogma would have you believe.
Reading through those articles.
I find it somehow bizarre that when it comes to sticking a Knife into somebody. Being out of your head on booze and illegal narcotics is apparently considered a mitigating factor, and yet, should one run somebody over driving a car while so afflicted, it would undoubtedly be considered an aggravating factor (To the extent that it is considered a specific offence)...
"The pair had a drink and drug-fuelled argument, and Woodward punched and swiped at the victim with a bread knife. She then stabbed the man before hurling a laptop, glass and a jam jar at him."
Yes, that is exactly what I want from my GP. Exactly the sort of medical professional we need in the UK. Someone who is willing to break UK law, abuse the drugs they have access to, ready to lose their temper etc, ready to assault someone and risk maiming them and risk killing them. Exactly what the UK medical profession is looking for.
IMO a jail term for breaking the law is the appropriate punishment and patently obvious.
Separate names with a comma.