|
Post by swl on Jan 19, 2009 17:44:48 GMT
linkThe sentencing is way too lenient. Six years? Already served one, 1/3 off for good behaviour etc etc - he'll be out in three.
|
|
|
Post by Alpha Hooligan on Jan 19, 2009 17:51:53 GMT
Hence the desire for the death penalty.
Admit it SWL...you'd happilly pull the trigger/flip the switch on these bastards. I would...no regrets. They deserve it.
AH
|
|
|
Post by swl on Jan 19, 2009 18:02:22 GMT
No. That girl has got a lifetime of suffering ahead of her, why should they get away with a moment's discomfort then ...... nothing?
Put them in a 4ft x 4ft concrete cell, throw them minimum calories every day and leave them to rot, faced only with their own demons.
|
|
|
Post by trubble on Jan 19, 2009 18:21:05 GMT
Turns my stomach too. Reading their alleged attitude through the trial, it looks like their sentence could become a badge of honour rather than useful or just punishment/rehabilitation or whatever it is supposed to be doing for them/us. www.haringeyindependent.co.uk/news/3935094.Gang_rape_accused____think_they_did_nothing_wrong___/6 years!!! It's shameful. They should have been tried for attempted murder. But I suppose the caustic soda was to destroy forensics rather than kill - do you recall a poster called James once saying that the crimes will only get more horrific ( and me agreeing) as the dna tests and database become more relied upon? He could be right then? btw, remember this story last year? www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2008/dec/09/crime-hackney-rape-gangVery similar. They got similar sentences too. Realistically, how do you work out a sentence? A couple of years ago rape sentences were due to be shortened in the UK because of lack of prison space (a disgusting reason) - did that happen? Is six years considered a hefty sentence for rape? With GBH and such life altering results you'd think it would be more like 10. Not that I'm arguing against the excellent suggestions already proffered! I can't. These little bastards leave me speechless.
|
|
|
Post by riotgrrl on Jan 19, 2009 18:48:17 GMT
I think 6 years is about 'average for rape', but you have to bear in mind that this includes all those date rapes, where the sentencing is usually not as high. The maximum possible penalty for rape is life, and some rapists do get it but not many. It seems low for a rape of this nature. Trubs: The given reason for suggesting lower rape sentences by the Sentencing Council was not the prison space thing, but that the rehabilitation courses for sex offenders these days are pretty intense. www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2006/mar/12/prisonsandprobation.ukcrimeThe Sentencing Council (which applies only to the English/Welsh jurisdiction) recommendation for rape: The guideline uses the starting point of 5 years for the rape of an adult with no aggravating or mitigating factors (derived from Millberry and others1) as the baseline from which all other sentences for offences in this guideline have been calculated. Since the judgment in Millberry, changes introduced by the CJA 2003 have both affected the structure of custodial sentences of 12 months and above and introduced new sentences for those convicted of many of the offences in this guideline where the court considers that the offender provides a significant risk of serious harm in the future. www.sentencing-guidelines.gov.uk/docs/0000_SexualOffencesAct1.pdf
|
|
|
Post by trubble on Jan 19, 2009 19:09:07 GMT
I think 6 years is about 'average for rape', but you have to bear in mind that this includes all those date rapes, where the sentencing is usually not as high. The maximum possible penalty for rape is life, and some rapists do get it but not many. It seems low for a rape of this nature. Trubs: The given reason for suggesting lower rape sentences by the Sentencing Council was not the prison space thing, but that the rehabilitation courses for sex offenders these days are pretty intense. www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2006/mar/12/prisonsandprobation.ukcrimeThe Sentencing Council (which applies only to the English/Welsh jurisdiction) recommendation for rape: The guideline uses the starting point of 5 years for the rape of an adult with no aggravating or mitigating factors (derived from Millberry and others1) as the baseline from which all other sentences for offences in this guideline have been calculated. Since the judgment in Millberry, changes introduced by the CJA 2003 have both affected the structure of custodial sentences of 12 months and above and introduced new sentences for those convicted of many of the offences in this guideline where the court considers that the offender provides a significant risk of serious harm in the future. www.sentencing-guidelines.gov.uk/docs/0000_SexualOffencesAct1.pdfAha! Thank you for answering both of those. The strict regime is supervision mainly? - oh no, you mean counselling and therapy, I think. (counselling in the best sense of the word, not the charalatan one). I am struggling to work out how there hasn't been more than a year added on to the baseline of 5 years. How much more would they have to had done to get a mere 7? ( - the average for 2006, from your 1st article.) And maybe this isn't the thread for this but from your 2nd article: I can see where they are coming from but...ugh..it's depressing!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by riotgrrl on Jan 19, 2009 19:13:56 GMT
Sex Offenders Programmes run in the prisons are generally thought to be among the most likely to succeed of all programmes, plus most sexual offenders are forced to attend. They have separate halls, and sometimes separate prisons (Peterhead.)
I don't know much more about it than that, but I'm assuming - assuming - that this is what the Sentencing Council meant by the improved regimes.
|
|
|
Post by Big Lin on Jan 19, 2009 20:06:02 GMT
This is not 'just' rape - God knows I'm not trivialising that, but the exceptional brutality of the attack mean that a 6-year sentence is a total insult to the victim.
This type of thing is just the sort of crime that I think we need to bring back flogging for! To do what these scum did is just another order of bestiality.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2009 20:11:18 GMT
The man who actually threw the caustic soda was jailed for nine years. You might think that is too short too, but I'm throwing that in for the sake of accuracy!
|
|
|
Post by swl on Jan 19, 2009 20:20:01 GMT
Remember, this guy got 6 years for fraud canoe manFraud equals rape? On what planet?
|
|
|
Post by Big Lin on Jan 19, 2009 20:22:26 GMT
Personally, I'd flog the bastards, castrate them and send them off to Siberia for the rest of their lives!
|
|
|
Post by mindy on Jan 19, 2009 21:02:26 GMT
No. That girl has got a lifetime of suffering ahead of her, why should they get away with a moment's discomfort then ...... nothing? Put them in a 4ft x 4ft concrete cell, throw them minimum calories every day and leave them to rot, faced only with their own demons. I totally agree! This story makes me sick too. They've ruined her life, they should be serving life!
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Jan 20, 2009 15:15:48 GMT
the ONLY morally proper sentence for a crime such as this is death. notwithstanding the fact that any forcible rape is worthy of it, these pieces of shyt tried to murder her as well. what their intentions were in throwing the acid on her is totally irrelevant. NOTHING matters except the result. proper execution would be being buried in an acid pit, but alas, everyone is too uncivilized to administer morally proper justice
|
|