Sentences too harsh!

[becky]

And they will do. This is the NORM. This is what our judicary have decided is the right and proper thing to do. I believe this renders them not for purpose and want a completely new system put in place.

How about their neighbours stringing them up from the nearest lamppost? Ensures the evil ends once and for all........

Far right? Who? Me? Nah.....😉

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

So do you believe this sentence is proportionate to the crime? Given that many of the rioters face months/years in prison. What is the more outrageous crime?

I have no opinion on the matter. How can I have one?

I am not the Judge and don’t have all the evidence in front of me, or the experience to know what the best course of action might be.

Forming opinions on reports in either the media or worse on the internet is generally just a way to confirm a bias.

For some, however outrageous you might regard their crime, it could be determined that prison is not either appropriate for them or for society. For others, whose crimes you regard as less outrageous because you sympathise with their cause, the opposite applies. Lengthy sentences as a warning to others could be determined to be in society’s interests.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

Rehabilitation for him but not for the children involved.

I would hope that the children, if they can be identified, would be monitored and help given if they show any signs of being affected. Going after the actual perpetrators also seems important.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

And they will do. This is the NORM. This is what our judicary have decided is the right and proper thing to do. I believe this renders them not for purpose and want a completely new system put in place.

I suppose we must be grateful that what you want isn’t going to be delivered.

 

[Rudi Hedman]

I have no opinion on the matter. How can I have one?

I am not the Judge and don’t have all the evidence in front of me, or the experience to know what the best course of action might be.

Forming opinions on reports in either the media or worse on the internet is generally just a way to confirm a bias.

For some, however outrageous you might regard their crime, it could be determined that prison is not either appropriate for them or for society. For others, whose crimes you regard as less outrageous because you sympathise with their cause, the opposite applies. Lengthy sentences as a warning to others could be determined to be in society’s interests.

🥱

 

[Teddy Eagle]

I have no opinion on the matter. How can I have one?

I am not the Judge and don’t have all the evidence in front of me, or the experience to know what the best course of action might be.

Forming opinions on reports in either the media or worse on the internet is generally just a way to confirm a bias.

For some, however outrageous you might regard their crime, it could be determined that prison is not either appropriate for them or for society. For others, whose crimes you regard as less outrageous because you sympathise with their cause, the opposite applies. Lengthy sentences as a warning to others could be determined to be in society’s interests.

Only if society regards broken windows as more of a threat than sharing images of children being abused.
As has been said the authorities don't go to court unless they regard the evidence as sufficient. They did.
The defendant entered a guilty plea which was accepted.
How much confirmation is needed?

 

[cryrst]

I have no opinion on the matter. How can I have one?

I am not the Judge and don’t have all the evidence in front of me, or the experience to know what the best course of action might be.

Forming opinions on reports in either the media or worse on the internet is generally just a way to confirm a bias.

For some, however outrageous you might regard their crime, it could be determined that prison is not either appropriate for them or for society. For others, whose crimes you regard as less outrageous because you sympathise with their cause, the opposite applies. Lengthy sentences as a warning to others could be determined to be in society’s interests.

Mind you don’t fall off that fence. At the height you are it will be fatal !
Although if they were wearing maga hats it would be throw away the key no doubt.

 

[ASCPFC]

Mind you don’t fall off that fence. At the height you are it will be fatal !
Although if they were wearing maga hats it would be throw away the key no doubt.

Defending paedos whilst condemning concerned parents. Not for the first time either.

 

[Rudi Hedman]

Establishment man superhero.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

Only if society regards broken windows as more of a threat than sharing images of children being abused.
As has been said the authorities don't go to court unless they regard the evidence as sufficient. They did.
The defendant entered a guilty plea which was accepted.
How much confirmation is needed?

It has nothing at all to do with what society regards as more of a threat. That is determined by our representatives who make the law.

This has only to do with the actual evidence and precise circumstances of individual cases. How an experienced Judge views them will determine what they consider to be an appropriate course of action. As we have neither the evidence or the experience we are not competent to decide.

That’s totally different to having a general opinion on any category of crime. That we can all opine on. It’s specific cases where we cannot.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

Mind you don’t fall off that fence. At the height you are it will be fatal !
Although if they were wearing maga hats it would be throw away the key no doubt.

Not at all.

I condemn Trump and those behind him. Not the gullible who are fooled by it. Who knows what their individual circumstances are.

Explaining individual circumstances and offering mitigation is why we have defence lawyers.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

Defending paedos whilst condemning concerned parents. Not for the first time either.

Neither, of course, being true. Either now or on any previous occasion.

 

[Teddy Eagle]

It has nothing at all to do with what society regards as more of a threat. That is determined by our representatives who make the law.

This has only to do with the actual evidence and precise circumstances of individual cases. How an experienced Judge views them will determine what they consider to be an appropriate course of action. As we have neither the evidence or the experience we are not competent to decide.

That’s totally different to having a general opinion on any category of crime. That we can all opine on. It’s specific cases where we cannot.

Lengthy sentences as a warning to others could be determined to be in society’s interests.

 

[georgenorman]

It has nothing at all to do with what society regards as more of a threat. That is determined by our representatives who make the law.

This has only to do with the actual evidence and precise circumstances of individual cases. How an experienced Judge views them will determine what they consider to be an appropriate course of action. As we have neither the evidence or the experience we are not competent to decide.

That’s totally different to having a general opinion on any category of crime. That we can all opine on. It’s specific cases where we cannot.

At least we can elect the representatives who make the law, unlike the poor souls in the EU whose representatives not only do not make the laws, they can't even propose any laws.

 

[Rudi Hedman]

Another day of pro establishment lecturing 🥱

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

Lengthy sentences as a warning to others could be determined to be in society’s interests.

They could and are. But not always.

 

[Teddy Eagle]

They could and are. But not always.

Right. Prison sentences deter potential rioters but not peddlers of child abuse.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

At least we can elect the representatives who make the law, unlike the poor souls in the EU whose representatives not only do not make the laws, they can't even propose any laws.

Yes they do, by the delegation by the nation states of responsibility of the detailed decision making in agreed areas. Thus freeing up their own parliaments and civil servants to concentrate on those areas that matter most, whilst ensuring common standards exist that make commerce easier.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

Right. Prison sentences deter potential rioters but not peddlers of child abuse.

Wrong. It depends on the evidence and the information available to the judge. Every case is individually considered and on its merits. There is not and cannot be a one size fits all approach.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

Another day of pro establishment lecturing 🥱

I am merely stating the obvious truth.

If you choose not to see it that’s not my responsibility. Nor anyone’s but your own.

Blaming the “establishment” for the way our legal system has evolved is ridiculous.