ChatterBank2 mins ago
Danny Nightingale Guilty Of Possession Of A Firearm
16 Answers
Verdict just in....
Guilty.
[This time round]
He changed his defence for his retrial -
and I have to say I thought it was obvious he was lying....
Guilty.
[This time round]
He changed his defence for his retrial -
and I have to say I thought it was obvious he was lying....
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Peter Pedant. 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.There is a madatory 5 years for this offence unless the offence is 'exceptional'
The bar for it being exceptional is high!
One man took a gun to commit suicide and changed his mind and stored it in a 'reasonably secure place' - not exceptional - 5 years
a 24 year old mother of good character failed to notify the police on finding a firearm - not exceptional - 5 years
Gail Cochrane, aged 53, pleaded guilty to possessing an 80-year old Browning self-loading pistol. She had kept the gun at her home for 29 years following the death of her father (who had been in the Royal Navy). She thought it was just his war trophy. There was no ammunition for it. - not exceptional - 5 years
http:// thejust icegap. com/201 2/08/mi nimum-s entence s-minim um-just ice/
I cannot see that this case is any more deserving than any of the above but I suspect that because he is a soldier he'll get a more lenient sentence.
It really is a case of one law for us and one law for the military!
The bar for it being exceptional is high!
One man took a gun to commit suicide and changed his mind and stored it in a 'reasonably secure place' - not exceptional - 5 years
a 24 year old mother of good character failed to notify the police on finding a firearm - not exceptional - 5 years
Gail Cochrane, aged 53, pleaded guilty to possessing an 80-year old Browning self-loading pistol. She had kept the gun at her home for 29 years following the death of her father (who had been in the Royal Navy). She thought it was just his war trophy. There was no ammunition for it. - not exceptional - 5 years
http://
I cannot see that this case is any more deserving than any of the above but I suspect that because he is a soldier he'll get a more lenient sentence.
It really is a case of one law for us and one law for the military!
The minimum sentence is five years unless there are exceptional circumstances and in the original trial he was sentenced to eighteen months' custody because it was decided there were exceptional circumstances. What confuses me is the fact that the sentence had also been reduced because Nightingale had pled guilty but on the CPS site it says no reduction should be made because of a guilty plea. Now they are arguing which sentence should be imposed, the original eighteen months, the suspended one given after one of the previous appeals or a different one completely.
Military law has a catch-all provision whereby any crime contrary to English law is a crime against military law, so this man was dealt with by a military court for offences contrary to our civilian law.
Never helpful when a man recorded on video and on tape gives one version in interview and a completely different one at the trial or different ones in two trials. It does happen surprisingly often on retrials. It's as though the defendant thinks "Well that almost worked last time. Let's try plan B this time" It helps a bit if he tells his counsel beforehand !
Sentence? Well, as I said, the army wants him out of the army.That's the main aim. They will find special reasons if they can, as a concession for his being thrown out, just to make his life a little easier.
Never helpful when a man recorded on video and on tape gives one version in interview and a completely different one at the trial or different ones in two trials. It does happen surprisingly often on retrials. It's as though the defendant thinks "Well that almost worked last time. Let's try plan B this time" It helps a bit if he tells his counsel beforehand !
Sentence? Well, as I said, the army wants him out of the army.That's the main aim. They will find special reasons if they can, as a concession for his being thrown out, just to make his life a little easier.
In the transcript of the court martial in November 2012 it makes reference to Parliament's laying down a minimum sentence of five years for the firearm unless there are exceptional circumstances and it also says that had he not pled guilty, the likely sentence would have been more than three and a half years in custody.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.