This Judge Should Retire Or Be Retrained....

[trt]

This poor child has no future, and will need care till it dies young, and all they get is a couple of years.

What a bloody disgrace, and I hope they get what they deserve in prison!!!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4010066/Couple-jailed-leaving-baby-catastrophic-injuries.html

[vulcan42]

EDDIE51, thank you for your answer. I understand there were mitigating circumstances but like a lot of cases such as this, the punishment is totally inadequate for the crime committed.

[EDDIE51]

Anneasquith, so you support compulsory sterilization for those who commit a crime against a child? The start of a very slippery slope! If we allow that to happen it is but a short step to state sponsored genocide !

[EDDIE51]

Vulcan, it is a terrible conclusion but, if the child had died, the two parents would be facing a murder charge with a compulsory 'life' sentence.
As it is the charge of allowing a child to suffer harm was the only one possible.

[anneasquith]

Eddie, not quite , but anyone who intentionally severely injures/murders a child should not be allowed to reproduce until they have been assessed as decent potential parents, dog owners who have abused their dogs are prohibited to own an animal sometimes for long periods of time/ lifetime bans, babies/ children are far more important than animals.

[EDDIE51]

divebuddy, I imagine it was impossible to prove which of the two or both did it!
As said they are both suffering from major mental problems. A trial would be near impossible as they would not be able to understand the evidence. They have pleaded guilty which has saved a trial. A clever barrister may have been able to get them off if this had gone to a full trial.
Anneasquith , The Social services will be watching once the female gets out of prison, and if she gets pregnant the baby will be removed from her as soon as it is born. There are quite a few women in the UK who will have a child removed from their care straight after birth!

[EDDIE51]

Some information here, this is for Nottinghamshire but other areas are the same
http://nottinghamshirechildcare.proceduresonline.com/pdfs/sg_babies.pdf
In a case like this as soon as the social services become aware that the mother is pregnant they will get the court to issue a 'section 38 interim care order' this allows them to remove the child from the mother as soon as it is born.

[jourdain2]

EDDIE I'm ignorant on this. Can't such women be compulsorily sterilised? It would seem the obvious option with a history? Tubes tying would allow a reversal later should the situations change. Genuinely baffled.

[EDDIE51]

NO , compulsory sterilization is against all aspects of basic human rights.
Even Hitler could not get away with it!
Compulsory sterilisation would be viewed as GBH with intent!
If as I expect, the social services seek a section 38 order as soon as they know this woman has become pregnant she still has the option to challenge that order in court. Obviously in this case she does not have the intellectual capacity to mount such a challenge.
Compulsory sterilization is but a VERY short step from compulsory euthanasia, another one of Hitler's favorite occupations.

[Smowball]

Disgusting sentence. The judge should be locked up himself!

[EDDIE51]

Smowball have you actually read my answers?
The judge actually went out of his way to ensure the maximum possible sentence for the offence!! He even gave an extra 2 & 1/2 years! Judges DO NOT make up the sentence according to their view of the crime, they have to sentence in accordance with the guidelines .

[EDDIE51]

Smow read my answer at 23.28 yesterday !
The father got 8 & 1/2 years the maximum possible !!