I Wonder Why This Number Is Rising So...
Politics0 min ago
How on earth is this justified ?
29 Answers
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-20003058
"Judge Anne Molyneux said Oldfield had acted dangerously, disproportionately,"
the last word sums up this ridiculous judge and the way shes acted in sentencing.
"Judge Anne Molyneux said Oldfield had acted dangerously, disproportionately,"
the last word sums up this ridiculous judge and the way shes acted in sentencing.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by bazwillrun. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Methinks Mr Oldfield protesteth too much.
Whatever his views on “elitism” and “government cuts” his choice of venue to protest against them was most inappropriate. He may well be correct when he says the cuts proposed (but, incidentally, not yet achieved) by the Coalition are numerically greater than any made from 1812 to 1870, but of course the comparison is specious.
His wife hardly fares any better with her interpretation of the truth:"Anyone living here today knows Britain is a brutal, deeply divided, class-driven place." Yes, of course it is. That’s why people from all over the globe (including, ironically, Mr Oldfield) go to great lengths to settle here. It begs the question why, if the UK is such a brutal place to live, the sensitive Mr Oldfield does not instead choose to live in his, presumably, much more gentle native Australia.
Mr Oldfield is a foolish, misguided but most of all selfish individual who seems to think that the promotion of his views entitles him to act in a manner dangerous to himself and others and to spoil the enjoyment of millions. Judge Molyneux handed down a most appropriate sentence in line with sentencing guidelines and hopefully it may deter Mr Oldfield from embarking upon such a foolhardy venture in future. Better still, it might persuade the odious couple that their future may be less brutal if they settled elsewhere.
Whatever his views on “elitism” and “government cuts” his choice of venue to protest against them was most inappropriate. He may well be correct when he says the cuts proposed (but, incidentally, not yet achieved) by the Coalition are numerically greater than any made from 1812 to 1870, but of course the comparison is specious.
His wife hardly fares any better with her interpretation of the truth:"Anyone living here today knows Britain is a brutal, deeply divided, class-driven place." Yes, of course it is. That’s why people from all over the globe (including, ironically, Mr Oldfield) go to great lengths to settle here. It begs the question why, if the UK is such a brutal place to live, the sensitive Mr Oldfield does not instead choose to live in his, presumably, much more gentle native Australia.
Mr Oldfield is a foolish, misguided but most of all selfish individual who seems to think that the promotion of his views entitles him to act in a manner dangerous to himself and others and to spoil the enjoyment of millions. Judge Molyneux handed down a most appropriate sentence in line with sentencing guidelines and hopefully it may deter Mr Oldfield from embarking upon such a foolhardy venture in future. Better still, it might persuade the odious couple that their future may be less brutal if they settled elsewhere.
Different strokes for different folks I guess. A public order offence can carry a life sentence as a maximum, i think, so if you look at it that way maybe 6 months is appropriate :)
I think we should be reserving jail for genuine criminals wherever possible - not numpties trying to make a point. Fine and community service would have been appropriate i think...
I think we should be reserving jail for genuine criminals wherever possible - not numpties trying to make a point. Fine and community service would have been appropriate i think...
