| Author |
Message |
Stan Still
Moderator Group
Crown Skivvie
Joined: 04 September 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5521
|
 Topic: Another great day for British "justice" Posted: 20 February 2008 at 10:13am |
Take a look at this picture  This is Joe Paxton - he was driving a train in the Kidderminster area, minding his own business, when some morons dropped a slab off an overhead bridge. The slab bounced off one train and went through the windscreen of the cab that Mr Paxton was in. He was knocked unconscious and received serious injuries. The two oxygen thieves who performed this act of gross stupidity were caught and convicted. One of them was sent down for seven and a half years. The defence team for this waste of good skin promptly launched an appeal against the sentence. No doubt paid for by Legal Aid funded by the honest tax-payers of this country - you know, the likes of you, me and Mr Paxton. As a result of this appeal, Daniel Ratcliffe had his sentence reduced to six years, meaning he will be out in three. Free to "laugh and joke" about how he and his mate nearly killed a man. If I were Mr Paxton and his family, I don't think words could describe how I would be feeling right now. Thank you to the Court of Appeal for once again capitulating to the whims of the criminal and ignoring the victims of crime. You can read the story here.
|
|
The basic mission for which the police exist is to prevent crime and disorder.
|
IP Logged |
|
sykes
Van Driver
Joined: 31 July 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 152
|
 Posted: 20 February 2008 at 10:22am |
It does make you wonder where this country is heading.
If by some miracle we can get CPS to run with a job, we then have to fight the courts to get a suitable sentance on conviction, it apears nearly everyone makes an appeal very rarley are sentances upheld or increased I hate to say it but i feel we are going to suffer a backlash from all these descisions people will only be pushed so far before they have had enough
|
IP Logged |
|
Maverick22
Moderator Group
Brian Winner 2008
Joined: 30 July 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 26302
|
 Posted: 20 February 2008 at 10:32am |
|
It really is time we had a change of Judges in this Country. Most are decrepit old farts, who don't live in the real world, and live in leafy lanes in the stockbroker belt, where crime is almost non existant. I just hope the CPS can appeal this reduction in sentence, it makes a mockery of the law when some Scumbag can get just six years for nearly killing a man. It's time that a sentence can be increased on appeal, like the old days under Lord Justice Cassels who always increased sentences if a frivolous appeal was made. In Cassels days there were very few appeals as the Crims knew what the result would be, extra time.
|
|
The object of war is not to die for your country, but to make sure the other bastard dies for his. The secret to longevity is not dying.
|
IP Logged |
|
M&MBM
Moderator Group
Sheep Rescue Award
Joined: 22 November 2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 57742
|
 Posted: 20 February 2008 at 11:17am |
About 20 years ago, someone was killed by yobs dropping a concrete post from a bridge, but I can't remember whether it was from a bridge onto a train or onto a car on the motorway. If I remember rightly the yobs were convicted of at least manslaughter. But my memory is very hazy on this and I could be wrong.
Can someone please eplain to me why these new yobs were only convicted of criminal damage. If the man had dies, they would surely have faced at least manslaughter charges. Possibly even murder charges by transfered malice.... surely? So why, when they have so obviously caused suchGBH were they not tried for attempted murder? Is it the lack of mens rea for murder? Is it because GBH section 20 only carries 5 years and they couldn't prove intent for sec 18? Why did they not face both charges? or did they and were not found guilty of it for some bizarre reason?
There is something very wrong with our CJS which means that these yobs can be convicted of criminal damgae, yet seem to have got away with nearly ending a man's life. I don't like concurrent sentences. I don't like the way we the public are fobbed off with what sounds like a decent stretch, only to find that it means half that. I don';t like the way bail is given, and I don't like the fact that if somoen is remanded in custody, that time is counted as double upon conviction.
sykes is right. My first instinct is rage, and the hope that these two get sorted properly when they come out. Sooner or later, with this sort of injustice, people will take the law into their own hands, and that will be a bad day for justice.
|
MOP, Joker & reformed character. Honest. I moderate with purple prose
|
IP Logged |
|
Stan Still
Moderator Group
Crown Skivvie
Joined: 04 September 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5521
|
 Posted: 20 February 2008 at 11:32am |
|
Criminal Damage with intent to endanger life or being reckless as to whether life is endangered carries (Section 1(2) of the 1971 Act) carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment, so seven and a half years for a seventeen year old is a bit paltry to say the least!
There is also an offence under The Offences Against The Person Act 1861, which requires proof of intent to injure by throwing objects at trains. This also carries a maximum life sentence.
Whatever the offence, the possibility was there for a much, much longer sentence. However, the judge chose not to do this and the Appeal Court just compounded the problem.
|
|
The basic mission for which the police exist is to prevent crime and disorder.
|
IP Logged |
|
M&MBM
Moderator Group
Sheep Rescue Award
Joined: 22 November 2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 57742
|
 Posted: 20 February 2008 at 11:43am |
|
Oh, thanks Stan. I just feel so baffled by this. To my mind that should have carried life. I don';t care that the youth was young. It was entirely reckless, and nearly killed someone. He ought to have known that.
|
MOP, Joker & reformed character. Honest. I moderate with purple prose
|
IP Logged |
|
OldAfricaHand
Garage Sergeant
Joined: 28 July 2006
Location: Botswana
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1898
|
 Posted: 20 February 2008 at 12:02pm |
Originally posted by Maverick22
It really is time we had a change of Judges in this Country. Most are decrepit old farts, who don't live in the real world, and live in leafy lanes in the stockbroker belt, where crime is almost non existant.
Too true, Mav'
The only problem I have is that many of the new judges coming through the system might well be products of CPS and so they wont have much of a real understanding of reality!
Perhaps the time has come for there to be a provision that the jury can recommend that a specific sentence be passed and the judge has to take account of this recommendation.
I would prefer with scrotes like these that they be removed from society for good - they have neither right to continue to be part of our society nor any contribution to make. Life with the keys thrown away ...........
|
|
Brian
|
IP Logged |
|
tony_w
Garage Sergeant
Joined: 24 November 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1947
|
 Posted: 20 February 2008 at 12:22pm |
|
I do not believe that it is change of Magistrates and Judges that is needed, but more of a case of stopping the Politicians from interfering in legal matters. The former two can only award a sentence within the boundaries that the legislator allows them. Like just about all the reasons for the current run of things that have gone wrong - it is down to our current crop of Politicians. It is they who set what the terms of imprisonment should be and that is not what you see as the maximum sentence that can be awarded!
|
IP Logged |
|
benno
Barrack Room Lawyer
Joined: 09 December 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2066
|
 Posted: 20 February 2008 at 2:02pm |
Tony W - 100% spot on!
I used to think there was something wrong with our magistrates and judges ( and for sure, some of them are still lefty do-gooders), but I now realise that the wishy washy sentences they hand down are regulated by the sentencing guidelines imposed on them by the government.
The government needs to butt out of the CJS and let the judiciary do their job in protecting the public and punishing the guilty.
I will never understand how somebody can appeal against their sentence, or how they can appeal against their conviction unless some new evidence comes to light. There is something very rotten at the heart of the British justice system, and unless someone up high sees the light this country will continue deteriorating into a place where criminals have absolutely no fear at all.
|
IP Logged |
|
ex-job-ex-pat
Barrack Room Lawyer
Joined: 26 July 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2976
|
 Posted: 20 February 2008 at 5:06pm |
Originally posted by Maverick22
It really is time we had a change of Judges in this Country. Most are decrepit old farts, who don't live in the real world, and live in leafy lanes in the stockbroker belt, where crime is almost non existant. I just hope the CPS can appeal this reduction in sentence, it makes a mockery of the law when some Scumbag can get just six years for nearly killing a man. It's time that a sentence can be increased on appeal, like the old days under Lord Justice Cassels who always increased sentences if a frivolous appeal was made. In Cassels days there were very few appeals as the Crims knew what the result would be, extra time. Maybe we could import some from Saudi Arabia?
|
|
|
IP Logged |
|
benno
Barrack Room Lawyer
Joined: 09 December 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2066
|
 Posted: 21 February 2008 at 7:13am |
|
Why, so so they can sentence rape victims to being flogged?
Edited by benno - 21 February 2008 at 7:14am
|
IP Logged |
|
Maverick22
Moderator Group
Brian Winner 2008
Joined: 30 July 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 26302
|
 Posted: 21 February 2008 at 8:27am |
Originally posted by benno
Why, so so they can sentence rape victims to being flogged? No, but a bloody good flogging would probably teach the Scum that did this good. I bet there would be a scrabble to grab the whip first.
|
|
The object of war is not to die for your country, but to make sure the other bastard dies for his. The secret to longevity is not dying.
|
IP Logged |
|
BIkerider
Moderator Group
Joined: 03 February 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2676
|
 Posted: 21 February 2008 at 9:50am |
|
I din't think this is simply as case of left or right do-gooders, but more like a case of the judiciary not appreciating the effect this has on ordinary people like you and I.
This also may be governed by Gordo's cronies and their sentencing guidelines. Political intrusion in the judiciary should never be subscribed to.
Life imprisonment was available and the offence should command a sentence nearer to that. The drivers live is in tatters and probably wont work again whilst the two convicts will be out in 3 years.
|
|
Kingy from Tyneside
You were only supposed to blow the bloody doors off - Michael Caine in the original 'Italian Job'
|
IP Logged |
|
tony_w
Garage Sergeant
Joined: 24 November 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1947
|
 Posted: 21 February 2008 at 11:18am |
|
Whilst there is a lack of investment in the Prisons System, they will never be able to do anything! Recently the Government let out, in a blaze of publicity that they were building some new Super Prisons - What they did not say was that they were also closing some and that the total capacity was not being increased!
|
IP Logged |
|
ex-job-ex-pat
Barrack Room Lawyer
Joined: 26 July 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2976
|
 Posted: 21 February 2008 at 1:26pm |
|
That's true Tony. maybe if we executed a few no hope lifers, the population would go down!
|
|
|
IP Logged |
|
benno
Barrack Room Lawyer
Joined: 09 December 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2066
|
 Posted: 21 February 2008 at 3:53pm |
I wonder why parliament voted against the death penalty? Was it really the will of the general public? Did the Great British Public ever get a say in that?
I think it is time we had a national vote on bringing back the death penalty for people who commit murder or attempted murder. Then see what the public really feel (if they vote against it I'll shut up and retreat back into my corner!).
|
IP Logged |
|
Graham
Barrack Room Lawyer
Brian Winner 2009
Joined: 21 August 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 14617
|
 Posted: 21 February 2008 at 4:16pm |
Originally posted by bennoI wonder why parliament voted against the death penalty? Was it really the will of the general public? Did the Great British Public ever get a say in that?
I think it is time we had a national vote on bringing back the death penalty for people who commit murder or attempted murder. Then see what the public really feel (if they vote against it I'll shut up and retreat back into my corner!).
A five year moratorium was started in 1965 after a Private Member's Bill from Sydney Silverman MP was passed by both Houses of Parliament, so it was just a conscience vote. The passage of that bill & the permanent abolition in 1968, proposed by James Callaghan MP terrified most of the population. They thought murderers would run riot. That proved not to be the case.
Both of these MP's were Labour politicians, by the way.
European Union membership precludes the use of a death penalty, except in a time of war, but if there was a referendum in Britain on the return of the death penalty for murder there would be a resounding 'Yes' vote.
Edited by Graham - 21 February 2008 at 4:20pm
|
|
We all make mistakes. Even monkeys fall out of trees... but often only after they've tried scratching their butts with both hands.
|
IP Logged |
|
Judge Dreddy
Garage Sergeant
Resident Troll
Joined: 27 October 2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 925
|
 Posted: 21 February 2008 at 4:31pm |
The death penalty degrades the society in which it is enforced. I am against it.
The whole charade of black caps, hangmen and associated hangers on is like something out of the middle ages.
We have progressed and our society is more tolerant, compassionate then
it has ever been. Crime is not a major aspect of most our lifes but we have been persuaded wrongly that it is.
The fear of crime, built up by TV, the Media the Broadcasting debilitates us.
We should try to understand the human condition and work to improve that, not intensify dreadful sanctions for misbehaviour.
|
IP Logged |
|
Penbwlch
Moderator Group
Joined: 12 August 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 54567
|
 Posted: 21 February 2008 at 4:57pm |
Originally posted by GrahamA five year moratorium was started in 1965 after a Private Member's Bill from Sydney Silverman MP was passed by both Houses of Parliament, so it was just a conscience vote. The passage of that bill & the permanent abolition in 1968, proposed by James Callaghan MP terrified most of the population. They thought murderers would run riot. That proved not to be the case.
Oh, but it did. Just think of the number of murders we experience today and compare life now to life then. Any murder ran on the newspaper front pages for days, before disappearing to the inside pages for many more. Most murders today don't even get reported. What happened is that the Labour government fiddled the figures (what's new). At the time the Home Office recorded a murder if the crime was classified by police as a murder. The Home Office changed this to only recording a death as a murder if a person was convicted at court of murder. If a person was seen to murder someone but never got caught, it was never counted as a murder. Irrespective of what was the most accurate way of recording murders, this change resulted in a massive fall in the murders recorded by the Home Office. The government's statistics showing little change in the number of murders was actually an increase that was being covered up.
Edited by Penbwlch - 21 February 2008 at 4:58pm
|
I used to be conceited. Now I'm Perfect
|
IP Logged |
|
Morek54
Garage Sergeant
Brian Winner 2008
Joined: 19 September 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1647
|
 Posted: 21 February 2008 at 5:14pm |
Dreddy - Crime is not a major aspect of your life, but it may well be for others, who have fallen victim either directly or indirectly.
I don't really want to turn this into a debate over the death penalty, but I imagine you would think differently about seeking to understand the human condition of someone who had, god forbid, murdered someone close to you.
We have progressed in society. And yes, we are more tolerant and compassionate - though that is perhaps more to our detriment than anything else.
There are too many people out there seeking to understand and look after the rights and privileges of those who have no regard for others and have literally ruined other people's lives, not just their victims but also their friends and family.
There comes a point where we perhaps need to stop making excuses and understanding less and start properly punishing those who commit crime. And if that means the death penalty for those who are guilty of taking the life of another; then I won't necessarily be loosing any sleep I can assure you. That alas though is a mute point - it is highly unlikely ever to be reintroduced. But describing it as a dreadful sanction for misbehaviour is a boggling comment given the seriousness of the offences, which would attract such a penalty being significantly greater than simple misbehaviour as you put it.
Edited by Morek54 - 21 February 2008 at 5:17pm
|
|
New Labour: Soft on Crime, Tough on the Fighters of Crime
|
IP Logged |
|