Softly, softly:
Why can't the Attorney General just mind her own business?
Today she's interfering in the sentences handed out to a child-rapist. Apparently, two years is too lenient a sentence for someone who has sex with a ten-year-old. Never mind that the ten-year-old "consented", or that he thought she was sixteen. I mean, honestly, Baroness Scotland may as well say that people who accidentally trip and knock someone else off a cliff should be done for murder.
Sentencing Guidelines suggest 8-13 years for raping a ten-year-old. But then again when did Sentencing Guidelines ever mean anything to judges?
The law allows up to life imprisonment for rape of any age victim. What on earth do you have to do to get it, I wonder?
---------------------------------------------------------
Copyright of PC Bloggs.
Today she's interfering in the sentences handed out to a child-rapist. Apparently, two years is too lenient a sentence for someone who has sex with a ten-year-old. Never mind that the ten-year-old "consented", or that he thought she was sixteen. I mean, honestly, Baroness Scotland may as well say that people who accidentally trip and knock someone else off a cliff should be done for murder.
Sentencing Guidelines suggest 8-13 years for raping a ten-year-old. But then again when did Sentencing Guidelines ever mean anything to judges?
The law allows up to life imprisonment for rape of any age victim. What on earth do you have to do to get it, I wonder?
---------------------------------------------------------
Copyright of PC Bloggs.
posted by PC Bloggs at 23:45
15 Comments:
Don't even start to try and get your head round the sentencing policy. You'll go completely mad and wonder what you're bothering for.
Wibble, wibble. Why am I bothering?
05 October, 2007 00:09
Sentences?? isn't that what judges impose to try and help the poor deluded criminal from having to queue up outside the post office once a week to cash their giro?? Here was me thinking that they were supposed to use prison to keep said shitbag off the street to prevent creating more victims.... a cup of horlicks and some sleep for me I think!!!
05 October, 2007 00:19
This country is a frigging mess!
05 October, 2007 02:52
With all this talk of increased sentencing for whatever crime it is politically fashionable to be hard on this week - the Government is in reality is just rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic.
If I may be as bold to spell it out to them on your blog...
BUILD MORE PRISONS.
05 October, 2007 07:54
"A man has been jailed for 17 years
was convicted of 33 counts of rape and 10 serious acts of assault and gross indecency."
Then we read;
"Det Con Philip Aspinall said: "We are pleased with the verdict..."
QUITE. And THAT is the trouble. 17 years, the Ned will be out in what? 5? 8 maybe?
And Aspinall is PLEASED?
He should be attempting to assasinate the dip sh*t of a judge that,let this bastard off. He needs more that 17 years for ONE such poffence, let alone 33+!
Bundesmarine Polizei.
05 October, 2007 10:13
Knowing this government they would re-introduce the death penalty for any failed suicide attempts. Maybe even for the successful ones too.
05 October, 2007 10:25
To Anonymous 05 October, 2007 07:54
The DC is pleased with the verdict (guilty) it doesn't mean he is pleased with the sentence (17 years).
05 October, 2007 10:38
PC Bloggs said,
The law allows up to life imprisonment for rape of any age victim. What on earth do you have to do to get it, I wonder?
A couple of possible answers:
1. Not having friends in high places, which is maybe why Thomas Hamilton got his Firearms Certificate, i.e. he did know the right people.
2. Not keeping up appearances of respectability.
This one got less than a year.
05 October, 2007 13:45
Jail a sex offender in accordance with his/her crime?
That takes money and a back bone, I hear you say!
05 October, 2007 13:48
Yoy may recall the offenders in an internet paedophile case in the USA where they were sentenced consecutively resulting in something like 134 years before being able to apply for parole. Now THAT is justice. How I long(ed) for a judge to do that in this country instead of giving a couple of years knowing that the offender will have their sentences halved as soon as they walk through the prison gates 'for good behaviour'.
Plodnomore
05 October, 2007 16:50
there was one a couple of years ago sentenced in the states for a string of rapes and a couple of murders. 320 years in prison but he would be eligable for parole after 130 years - I would LOVE to see that kind of sentence and even sense of humour in our courts.
06 October, 2007 01:11
13, Consent .. lovely.
CJA anyone ?
07 October, 2007 20:40
Its not all doom and gloom
take a look
http://www.stoptheguns.org/goodnews/behindbars.php
07 October, 2007 20:42
just watched road wars (I know, job pissed) there was a clip from the states where a Police officer was shot in the shoulder by one of 4 people trying to leave the state and stopped after a random spot. The sentence?? 107 years for the shooter (who took 3 rounds himself in the insuing shootout) and between 5-17 years for the other 3 in being concerned in the attack.
I think you'll agree that'll be a proper sentence.
09 October, 2007 22:32
This comment has been removed by the author.
15 April, 2009 09:36
Post a Comment
<< Home