dune Posted 17 August, 2011 Share Posted 17 August, 2011 Some of the sentences handed out so far do seem over the top. Clearly this is not about punishment or rehabilitation, but is all about sending out a message. This doesn't seem like justice to me. In a democracy the punishment should fit the crime. This is not to say the rioting/looting wasn't disgraceful btw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 17 August, 2011 Share Posted 17 August, 2011 Tough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 17 August, 2011 Author Share Posted 17 August, 2011 Tough. Is that tough as in tough or tough as in tough? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 17 August, 2011 Share Posted 17 August, 2011 Is that tough as in tough or tough as in tough? The latter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seaford Saint Posted 17 August, 2011 Share Posted 17 August, 2011 Some of the sentences handed out so far do seem over the top. Clearly this is not about punishment or rehabilitation, but is all about sending out a message. This doesn't seem like justice to me. In a democracy the punishment should fit the crime. This is not to say the rioting/looting wasn't disgraceful btw. Shock horror we agree on something...this can't be right. In my view a democracy should not need to change its legal system at will. Its what we have done and I clearly think and thought that these looters should have got punished. Punishment is not fitting the crime Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingeletiss Posted 17 August, 2011 Share Posted 17 August, 2011 The scum deserve all they get, it should be more imo 5 years would be a start. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 17 August, 2011 Author Share Posted 17 August, 2011 The scum deserve all they get, it should be more imo 5 years would be a start. In the case of an arsonist who endangered life i'd agree with a tough sentence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 17 August, 2011 Share Posted 17 August, 2011 Shock horror we agree on something...this can't be right. In my view a democracy should not need to change its legal system at will. Its what we have done and I clearly think and thought that these looters should have got punished. Punishment is not fitting the crime What would you say is the right level of punishment? (I prefer to use the word 'deterrent' rather than 'punishment') Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 17 August, 2011 Author Share Posted 17 August, 2011 What would you say is the right level of punishment? (I prefer to use the word 'deterrent' rather than 'punishment') If someone nicks a pair of trainers on a normal day or during a looting session they are still nicking a pair of trainers. (I prefer to use the word "rehabilitation" rather than punishment) This is no different to fighting in a town on a friday night versus fighting after a few beers on the day of a football match. It's closer to marxism than to democracy having a penal system that is politically influenced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thefunkygibbons Posted 17 August, 2011 Share Posted 17 August, 2011 Strong deterrent message, but then again, I should imagine that many businesses in the towns affected by the rumours spent money boarding up and many people worried about the riot unneccessarily As was the case with the discussion here when we had heard about the Southampton riot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tony13579 Posted 17 August, 2011 Share Posted 17 August, 2011 lets put this in perspective...... http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/9196593.Jail_for_woman_who_failed_to_take__golden_opportunity_/ A SERIAL offender has been jailed (60 weeks)after failing to take advantage of a final “golden opportunity” to turn her life around. With convictions for more than 200 offences, a Southampton Crown Court judge was told Kelly Loader is an “exceptional mother”. The 32-year-old had two suspended sentences hanging over her when, six months pregnant, she repeatedly headbutted a security guard at Southampton General Hospital who was trying to detain her after reports she had stolen a purse Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustMike Posted 17 August, 2011 Share Posted 17 August, 2011 deserve what they get, they caused too much distress, damage, etc etc. Knew it wouldnt be long before the Human Rights peeps got involved... http://news.sky.com/home/uk-news/article/16051275 In a word...duck off! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHAPEL END CHARLIE Posted 17 August, 2011 Share Posted 17 August, 2011 A 4 year sentence for posting something stupid on the internet ...... run for the hills ! they can't catch us all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Saint Posted 17 August, 2011 Share Posted 17 August, 2011 I think the sentences are harsh but just. They need to be harsh enough to make people take notice and believe that their actions if unlawful have consequences. If people knew what the courts reaction would be prior to the riots, I suspect a lot more people would have stayed off the street. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Saint Posted 17 August, 2011 Share Posted 17 August, 2011 lets put this in perspective...... http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/9196593.Jail_for_woman_who_failed_to_take__golden_opportunity_/ A SERIAL offender has been jailed (60 weeks)after failing to take advantage of a final “golden opportunity” to turn her life around. With convictions for more than 200 offences, a Southampton Crown Court judge was told Kelly Loader is an “exceptional mother”. The 32-year-old had two suspended sentences hanging over her when, six months pregnant, she repeatedly headbutted a security guard at Southampton General Hospital who was trying to detain her after reports she had stolen a purse Just goes to show that a lenient policy doesn't work. Perhaps if she had had the book thrown at her on conviction number one, the other 199 may not have happened. I know I am sailing into controversial waters here, but frankly, I am sick of people in this country taking the p*** and acting as if law is an inconvenience. I am also sick of the civil liberties brigade who start chirpping up every time stand is made against the general lawlessness in this country. Rant over Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seaford Saint Posted 17 August, 2011 Share Posted 17 August, 2011 What would you say is the right level of punishment? (I prefer to use the word 'deterrent' rather than 'punishment') Whatever is current at the time...What's happened here is that guidance has ben issued to judges to be harsh etc. There is a copy of the letter. All I am saying is that in a healthy democracy you don't have to change to longer and harsher sentences. Whatever is in place at the time should suffice. Who decided to increase the severity of punishments? Who agreed to this? There's a bad smell in the fridge. Don't think that I am soft on crime, I am not but some of the punishments clearly don't fit the crime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingeletiss Posted 17 August, 2011 Share Posted 17 August, 2011 A 4 year sentence for posting something stupid on the internet ...... run for the hills ! they can't catch us all. But I hope they do! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HK_Phoey Posted 17 August, 2011 Share Posted 17 August, 2011 In relative terms, some of the current current "deterrents" being handed out my be harsh. Having said this these people have shown a complete disregared for the law, for the community and in some cases the lives and welfare of ordinary people and the police. Personnally I think these sentences are fair. It's other crime that is not effectively being deterred, some of the sentencing for quite serious crimes are pathetic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjsaint Posted 17 August, 2011 Share Posted 17 August, 2011 These sentences are not fair but life isn't fair. An orderly society is more important than two individuals' 'rights'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miserableoldgit Posted 17 August, 2011 Share Posted 17 August, 2011 Whatever is current at the time...What's happened here is that guidance has ben issued to judges to be harsh etc. There is a copy of the letter. All I am saying is that in a healthy democracy you don't have to change to longer and harsher sentences. Whatever is in place at the time should suffice. Who decided to increase the severity of punishments? Who agreed to this? There's a bad smell in the fridge. Don't think that I am soft on crime, I am not but some of the punishments clearly don't fit the crime. What if what`s in place at the time isn`t actually sufficient? Most things (including sentencing) change/evolve to suit the prevailing environment. Maybe, just maybe these sentences reflect the the unusual outbreak of lawlessness, and the public fear that went with it, that took place last week. People that thought that they would probably just get an ASBO have had a rude awakening. I guess that the saying "If you can`t do the time, then don`t do the crime" applies here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastleighSoulBoy Posted 17 August, 2011 Share Posted 17 August, 2011 The scum deserve all they get, it should be more imo 5 years would be a start. Where would the relevance be to a sentance for murder? One fellow recently sentenced got something like 7 years (IIRC) so is his punishment too lenient then? As Dune says, there is a need for a clear message to be sent out. The question is, without severe action, how do we do it? 20/20 comments that a democracy should not be able to change a law at will. Sadly it's a Utopian notion becuse Governments can, and will, change laws if necessary. In times of turmoil (war, insurrection) they will have to act quickly and make some stark decisions. It's the very fact that our democracy doesn't make these changes that often which shows we still are a great country and the majority of us are decent and law abiding! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View From The Top Posted 17 August, 2011 Share Posted 17 August, 2011 If I understand it correctly the sentencing is harsher simply because the they fall under the riot guidelines and not the theft guidelines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastleighSoulBoy Posted 17 August, 2011 Share Posted 17 August, 2011 A 4 year sentence for posting something stupid on the internet ...... run for the hills ! they can't catch us all. They'd have a field day on this forum then....myself included! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GenevaSaint Posted 17 August, 2011 Share Posted 17 August, 2011 Some of the sentences handed out so far do seem over the top. Clearly this is not about punishment or rehabilitation, but is all about sending out a message. This doesn't seem like justice to me. In a democracy the punishment should fit the crime. This is not to say the rioting/looting wasn't disgraceful btw. Excessivly harsh sentences and the worst thing is there's no consistency. There are people getting 6 months and others getting 18-24 months for what is essentially the same crime if they go to crown court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dingbattigger Posted 17 August, 2011 Share Posted 17 August, 2011 Just goes to show that a lenient policy doesn't work. Perhaps if she had had the book thrown at her on conviction number one, the other 199 may not have happened. I know I am sailing into controversial waters here, but frankly, I am sick of people in this country taking the p*** and acting as if law is an inconvenience. I am also sick of the civil liberties brigade who start chirpping up every time stand is made against the general lawlessness in this country. Rant over This Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingeletiss Posted 17 August, 2011 Share Posted 17 August, 2011 Where would the relevance be to a sentance for murder? One fellow recently sentenced got something like 7 years (IIRC) so is his punishment too lenient then? As Dune says, there is a need for a clear message to be sent out. The question is, without severe action, how do we do it? 20/20 comments that a democracy should not be able to change a law at will. Sadly it's a Utopian notion becuse Governments can, and will, change laws if necessary. In times of turmoil (war, insurrection) they will have to act quickly and make some stark decisions. It's the very fact that our democracy doesn't make these changes that often which shows we still are a great country and the majority of us are decent and law abiding! Depends on what you believe. I believe that pre-meditated murder should be life, and I mean life, manslaughter should depend on each individual case. I also believe in capital punishment for child murder, and that of killing a policeman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatch Posted 17 August, 2011 Share Posted 17 August, 2011 my heart bleeds for them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minsk Posted 17 August, 2011 Share Posted 17 August, 2011 I don't think that these sentences are too harsh; I think that the majority of other sentences handed out in the UK are too lenient. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tony13579 Posted 17 August, 2011 Share Posted 17 August, 2011 How much income tax do you want to pay to lock up each scroat for 4 years? £10 a week ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 17 August, 2011 Share Posted 17 August, 2011 How much income tax do you want to pay to lock up each scroat for 4 years? £10 a week ? How much income tax do you want to pay to have to process them every 6 months when they get let out early and re-offend? £20 a week? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 17 August, 2011 Share Posted 17 August, 2011 Whatever is current at the time...What's happened here is that guidance has ben issued to judges to be harsh etc. There is a copy of the letter. All I am saying is that in a healthy democracy you don't have to change to longer and harsher sentences. Whatever is in place at the time should suffice. Fair point. I agree, the "deterent" should be known at the time that someone decides to commit the crime rather than the goalposts moved before they are tried and sentenced. For example, if the "deterent" for breaking a 30 MPH speed limit by 5 MPH is 3 points and £60,I'd feel somewhat aggrieved if someone changed the "deterent" to instant castration after I'd been stopped for doing 32 MPH. However, if I knew the "deterent" was instant castration before getting behind the wheel, I'd make damn sure my speed was nearer 20 MPH than 30 MPH at all times! All crime should have a hefty "deterent" IMHO (Cue the "what if you're wrongly convicted?" counter-argument....) :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saint boggy Posted 17 August, 2011 Share Posted 17 August, 2011 A 4 year sentence for posting something stupid on the internet ...... run for the hills ! they can't catch us all. encitement to riot is NOT "posting something stupid on the internet". Most of these 'looting' rampages (they weren't 'riots' they were stealing and vandalism on a grand scale ,pure and simple). I couldn't give a monkey's whether some people think it's too harsh.....TOUGH!!....no-one MADE the scum of society come out onto the streets and start smashing our cities up,ruining lives and businesses, they thought it was FUN ffs!!! there was NO political or social agenda behind their actions, they are scum and I ,for one, am glad that they are off our streets,and the longer they are off the streets,the better!.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tony13579 Posted 17 August, 2011 Share Posted 17 August, 2011 The appropriate sentence is the cheapest one that brings a correction in the behavior and the minimal social damage to the offenders family and the community in the long term. Locking up a single mum 3 years as reported yesterday for a stolen pair of shorts for a first offence might put two children into care and create two new problems. equally making a shoplifter pay a £75 fixed penalty ticket is hardly a deterrent if they made 25 £100 thefts before they got caught. Sending someone for a custodial sentence is the ends thier career in many lines of employment. It should not be used as a first option, however no one should get to 10 offences without a short custodial sentence let alone 200. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minsk Posted 17 August, 2011 Share Posted 17 August, 2011 encitement to riot is NOT "posting something stupid on the internet". Most of these 'looting' rampages (they weren't 'riots' they were stealing and vandalism on a grand scale ,pure and simple). I couldn't give a monkey's whether some people think it's too harsh.....TOUGH!!....no-one MADE the scum of society come out onto the streets and start smashing our cities up,ruining lives and businesses, they thought it was FUN ffs!!! there was NO political or social agenda behind their actions, they are scum and I ,for one, am glad that they are off our streets,and the longer they are off the streets,the better!.... This Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tony13579 Posted 17 August, 2011 Share Posted 17 August, 2011 The biggest problem is the day to day use of fixed penalty tickets or cautions for serous crimes. I was puled out of my car by a taxi duriver and kicked in the head giving me concussion. he was cautioned! Attempted breakins are cautioned as vandalisim or criminal damage and given a £75 ticket. the home owner is then lectured and told it is thier fault and they should spend another £500-1000 on security, fences, *****ly plants... etc This grand gesture of 3-4 year sentences is too late. how did this woman get 200 offences and two suspended sentences before getting prison? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seaford Saint Posted 17 August, 2011 Share Posted 17 August, 2011 I don't think that these sentences are too harsh; I think that the majority of other sentences handed out in the UK are too lenient. I agree Minsk...but we the people don't appear to be able to influence this...someone else did and that for me is worrying Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seaford Saint Posted 17 August, 2011 Share Posted 17 August, 2011 encitement to riot is NOT "posting something stupid on the internet". Most of these 'looting' rampages (they weren't 'riots' they were stealing and vandalism on a grand scale ,pure and simple). I couldn't give a monkey's whether some people think it's too harsh.....TOUGH!!....no-one MADE the scum of society come out onto the streets and start smashing our cities up,ruining lives and businesses, they thought it was FUN ffs!!! there was NO political or social agenda behind their actions, they are scum and I ,for one, am glad that they are off our streets,and the longer they are off the streets,the better!.... 4 years? Come on.....you can't be serious!!! I agree about the rioters getting custodial sentences but 4 years for incitement? I can't see how that's proportionate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 17 August, 2011 Share Posted 17 August, 2011 Locking up a single mum 3 years as reported yesterday for a stolen pair of shorts for a first offence might put two children into care and create two new problems. Would this single mum have stolen the shorts if she knew (in no uncertain terms) there was a likelihood of being locked up for 3 years? I think we agree that the deterent/punishment needs to be made clear up front. Maybe we disagree on how 'harsh' that deterent should be (of course, the less harsh it is the less of a deterent it becomes) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miserableoldgit Posted 17 August, 2011 Share Posted 17 August, 2011 I agree Minsk...but we the people don't appear to be able to influence this...someone else did and that for me is worrying Do you not think that one of the reasons for the tougher sentencing is because of the public outcry for retribution during and just after the lawlessness? I would suggest that "the people" had a great say in this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sour Mash Posted 17 August, 2011 Share Posted 17 August, 2011 Some of the sentences handed out so far do seem over the top. Clearly this is not about punishment or rehabilitation, but is all about sending out a message. This doesn't seem like justice to me. In a democracy the punishment should fit the crime. This is not to say the rioting/looting wasn't disgraceful btw. Believe it or not I agree. Also, do any of the legal experts on here know if some of the over the top sentencing will open up the chance for appeals/compensation for some of those sentenced? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 17 August, 2011 Share Posted 17 August, 2011 (edited) 4 years? Come on.....you can't be serious!!! I agree about the rioters getting custodial sentences but 4 years for incitement? I can't see how that's proportionate To me, the "proportionality" is not the key consideration here. The important thing is to make it absolutely clear to people what the punishment/deterent is upfront. People can then decide whether they want to commit the crime in the first place. If people are "inciting riots" whilst ignorant of the penal consequences then the governement should start a national advertising campaign to raise awareness. How many people would have "incited riots" if they knew, in no uncertain terms, that the punishment was having their penis chopped off? People need to have an element of fear in doing wrong. I think we've gradually lost that fear factor over the last 50 years. Edited 17 August, 2011 by trousers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sour Mash Posted 17 August, 2011 Share Posted 17 August, 2011 Also, from a lot of the reports I've seen, they seem to have caught more of the naive idiots that grabbed bits and pieces out of the shops once they shops had already been raided and were "soft" targets for the police, as oppossed to the serious groups out doing serious damage, all with their faces completely covered that the police decided to stand off and were too scared to get involved with. Haven't seen too many of them being arrested and charged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 17 August, 2011 Share Posted 17 August, 2011 (edited) Also, from a lot of the reports I've seen, they seem to have caught more of the naive idiots that grabbed bits and pieces out of the shops once they shops had already been raided They didn't catch me....because I chose not to get involved in the criminality.... Edited 17 August, 2011 by trousers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miserableoldgit Posted 17 August, 2011 Share Posted 17 August, 2011 Also, from a lot of the reports I've seen, they seem to have caught more of the naive idiots that grabbed bits and pieces out of the shops once they shops had already been raided and were "soft" targets for the police, as oppossed to the serious groups out doing serious damage, all with their faces completely covered that the police decided to stand off and were too scared to get involved with. Haven't seen too many of them being arrested and charged. The police have caught the various people who (alledgedly) were in the car the killed the three Asians, the 16 year old that was responsible for the death of the pensioner, the guy who set light to Miss Selfridge, the people who set light to the furniture store amongst others. I believe that something like 1600 people have been arrested. I think that they have detained people right across the spectrum of wrongdoers, not just the naive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingeletiss Posted 17 August, 2011 Share Posted 17 August, 2011 I don't believe there has been a change in the law by a Parliament vote, so all sentencing is within the guidelines laid down by current legislation. So it's simple, those being sentenced by the courts, are being dealt with in a manner, that the law depicts as being justice. Again, personally, I have hasher sentences, trousers hit the nail on the head with this They didn't catch me....because I chose not to get involved in the criminality.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sour Mash Posted 17 August, 2011 Share Posted 17 August, 2011 They didn't catch me....because I chose not to get involved in the criminality.... You know what I mean if you read/quote my whole post properly. I am all for everyone involved being prosecuted fully by the law - but from what I see, the more serious criminals seem to have got away with it and the police have picked the softest/easiest targets. Lets see how many they really do go after in the next couple of months or if their promise to go after each and every one of them wanes once something else is flavour of the month in the news. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingeletiss Posted 17 August, 2011 Share Posted 17 August, 2011 The police have caught the various people who (alledgedly) were in the car the killed the three Asians, the 16 year old that was responsible for the death of the pensioner, the guy who set light to Miss Selfridge, the people who set light to the furniture store amongst others. I believe that something like 1600 people have been arrested. I think that they have detained people right across the spectrum of wrongdoers, not just the naive. Including the 'fiancée' of Mr Duggan, admittedly for alleged drug dealing, but it shows the police are going all out on this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miserableoldgit Posted 17 August, 2011 Share Posted 17 August, 2011 You know what I mean if you read/quote my whole post properly. I am all for everyone involved being prosecuted fully by the law - but from what I see, the more serious criminals seem to have got away with it and the police have picked the softest/easiest targets. Lets see how many they really do go after in the next couple of months or if their promise to go after each and every one of them wanes once something else is flavour of the month in the news. The police have caught the various people who (alledgedly) were in the car the killed the three Asians, the 16 year old that was responsible for the death of the pensioner, the guy who set light to Miss Selfridge, the people who set light to the furniture store amongst others. I believe that something like 1600 people have been arrested. I think that they have detained people right across the spectrum of wrongdoers, not just the naive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tony13579 Posted 17 August, 2011 Share Posted 17 August, 2011 (edited) The average cost of a prison place in 2002 was £38753 per year My understanding is that 3000 people will face various charges. If the majority get 2-4 years thats 9000 prison years @ 38753 =£116,25900 thats about 10 secondary schools, or 21,000 people recieving an hour a day home help for a year To a first time offender, a 3 week sentence might/probobly will, put them into thier place. the other 3 years is £10,000 of wasted money Edited 17 August, 2011 by tony13579 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GenevaSaint Posted 17 August, 2011 Share Posted 17 August, 2011 Anderson Fernandes, 22, was warned by a judge at Manchester Magistrates' Court that he may face jail after he admitted stealing two scoops of ice cream. He will be sentenced next week. Nicolas Robinson, 23, of Borough, south-east London, was jailed for six months for stealing a £3.50 case of water from Lidl supermarket Mother-of-two Ursula Nevin, from Manchester, was jailed for five months for receiving a pair of shorts given to her after they had been looted from a city centre store. mmmmm, now they're stupid, but a jail term for those crimes? I would've thought 2 years community service would've been better in these 3 cases. Oh an one other thing, where are all of these prison places coming from! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now