Human Rights groups say the sentences are too tough on the looters?

[Bobbisox]

I suppose when you see the two lads getting 4 yrs for inciting a riot on FB which didn't happen anyway and someone who was actually in the thick of things getting 6 months?
Do you think the HR Laws will ever be overhauled as promised, or are we being told this for appeasement ?

[emmie]

Bobbie did hear the same on the radio earlier today, perhaps some have a point, stiff sentences for some, whilst others seem, though perhaps not, to have got lighter treatment. Doesnt it depend on the judge, as there is often this disparity, one judge gives a burglar 4 years, another judge gives out a community order. Don't do the crime seems to be the order of the day, if you don't want to go to jail.

[Bobbisox]

hi em, I think "You are going to be made an example of me laddo" springs to mind, and why not?

[modeller]

sandyRoe Why do you always scrape the bottom of the barrel to justify your support of immigrants who abuse our laws and system, also your answer had little relevance to the main thrust of the post.
However in the case you quoted . A family came here supposedly as visitors .We were stupid enough to accept them when it was obvious to anyone except do gooders that they wanted free treatment for their son and had no intention of leaving after 6 months. This is happening every year and will continue as long as people like you refuse to face the fact we can not support the rest of the world who want to come here. We have a population of 60 million and you would bring in the 1000 million who by our standards are living in poverty.
I don't doubt your sincerity although I would like to know how many of these families you have sharing your house ?

[Old_Geezer]

The sentencing does seem to have been rather inconsistent. Probably due to the rush to get everyone through the courts. I would expect the harsher sentences to be appealed.

[sandyRoe]

Modeller, New Judge asked me: 'Which authorities are abusing which powers?'
I gave an example.
As for your other point, I have a Ugandan family living in the basement flat.

[modeller]

Compared with the soft sentences of the past anything harder than a slap on the wrist is harsh and Kenneth Clarke would't even slap. More like invite them to tea, a bit like a headmaster worked with . He use to take any pupil being punished by a teacher into his office , give them a cup of tea and have a little chat. In case you are wondering this included drug dealers and cases of violence.

[Keleez]

The sentences we tough because thats what our Prime Minister ordered, he looked like a right idiot on tv by day 3 of the riots, then he decided to allow the police to do as they see fit, which including police ganging up on single looters and beating them to the ground with their batons and also kicking the looters whilst they lay on the floor...ive seen the footage...they also order judges to sentence as hard as they saw fit...i live in London so i was in the middle of all this, i do think that the rioters, looters and criminals should be punished, but ignoring basic human rights is violating our own laws that are set in place to protect us, if our PM doesn't watch himself, he will have another riot on his hand and he will lose his office, if a General Election was called for now he would be out the door before he could say his own name

[anotheoldgit]

/// As for your other point, I have a Ugandan family living in the basement flat.///

And how much are you charging the government for their accommodation, Sandy?

[sandyRoe]

It's a rather run down place. If I had it painted and tidied up a bit I could get considerably more in rent than I'm charging.

[modeller]

OK sandyRoe thats a start but only one ! What about the others ?
To accommodate all those who you would allow in , you should be housing at least one family in each room and even that would not satify the demand.
Your heart may be in the right place but it appears to rule your head.

As a matter of fact when I speak to immigrants most of them also say we shouldn't allow more in apart from all their own relatives that is.

[dave50]

If as is stated, these heavy sentances were imposed because of public outcry and public demand for justice then so be it, go with the public mood, that's justice.

[anotheoldgit]

The Judiciary cannot win, if they had given out soft sentences there would have been an outcry.

The police cannot win, if they had shown more force there would have been cries of police violence.

The politicians cannot win, no matter what increased measures they announced, there would have been cries of a dictatorial state.

One law that could be changed though, and that is the law that says criminals under a certain age cannot be named or identified.

[Zeuhl]

<<One law that could be changed though, and that is the law that says criminals under a certain age cannot be named or identified. >>

Yes, these feral children from dysfunctional homes would't dream of breaking the law if they thought they might be name-checked on the TV.

I don't think.

Or is it so their neighbours who think they are little angels will see what they are really like?

Or is there another, more sensible purpose for telling people who have nothing to do with the case who they are?
.

[New Judge]

It’s the second and third of your reasons, Zheul.

The Youth justice system in the UK is held in secret. Nobody knows who the miscreants are, what they have done or what sentence was handed down. I am profoundly uncomfortable with this. You have identified that neighbours in the miscreants’ locality might like to be told who they are and what they have been up to. It is also in the wider public interest for people to know details of prosecutions.

It is all part of the deal to which the public is subject. They relinquish the right to take action against those that commit crimes against them and in return they expect the police, the CPS and the courts to do so on their behalf. They cannot see if this deal is being fairly operated whilst courts are held in secret. There might be justification to withhold names of youngsters until they are convicted (though it’s debateable) but there is no justification to do so once they are convicted.

Secret criminal justice is bad justice.

[emmie]

Keleez like him or not, i think that if a general election was to be called right now, he would win with a majority. Clegg and his cohorts would be the ones shown the door, and as to basic human rights, fine, but i didn't see that those doing the looting were worried about others human rights, not to have their homes, businesses trashed. We also live here, and i have seen the devastion in many places, and believe me, whoever was responsible should face the full force of the law.

[Bobbisox]

I did see a report that they were going to make them wear high vis jackets and make them clear up the mess they reeked on innocent people, I think it had some lettering on the back saying OFFENDER.

[emmie]

Bobbiesox, i doubt it, the little bleeders will be crying for their mummies, and running to the nearest HR lawyers complaining of police brutality.

[Zeuhl]

<<Secret criminal justice is bad justice>>

Agreed. And if everyone knew what went on in the system there would be an uproar eg monthly writing off of unpaid fines or cancelling of victim compensation payments because of non existent 'time served'.

[Bobbisox]

yes and whinging how they were "forced " into wearing bright jackets...oh dear..LOL

[sandyRoe]

I surprised that nobody has suggested putting them on chain gangs.