"Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime" - Page 3

Osem · 09-04-2008, 13:38

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7338634.stm

Just been reading about Damilola Taylor's mother's death which brought back memories of what happened to him and who was responsible:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4777451.stm

So it took the murder of an entirely innocent young man to finally get these serial offending scumbags off our streets! I bet they'd been laughing at Bliar's so called 'tough' approach for years!

Incognitas · 09-04-2008, 14:23

What a shame Osem..She always came across as a really dignified woman.

Osem · 09-04-2008, 14:44

Yes indeed - in stark contrast to those who took her son's life and all those like them who don't have respect for themselves let alone anyone else.

Osem · 25-04-2008, 13:19

Another fine example:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/w...ds/7366532.stm

Enuff · 25-04-2008, 20:37

Quote:

About a dozen people watched Shane struggle in the water and did not try to rescue him.

Maybe they were too scared.

Osem · 25-04-2008, 20:38

or maybe they were filming it on their mobiles.

Incognitas · 26-04-2008, 00:46

I am appalled at the very light sentence.How they were charged with manslaughter is beyond comprehension.I think they knew quite well that the young man could die but still carried on.I think it was murder.

Osem · 26-04-2008, 09:25

Surely manslaughter implies accidental or unintended death and I find it very hard to see how this could have been consisdered that. What did they think would happen to this lad? They may not have set out to deliberately kill him but, given the awful circumstances and such a protracted and deliberate assault, I think a much tougher sentence should have been handed down. If there are degrees of manslaughter then surely this sort of thing is among the worst possible.

"Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime" - if ever there was an indictment of Bliar's legacy and an example of how his cynical spin triumphed over substance then this is it!

If I were the victim's parent I'd have the words "A victim of Blair's New Labour" engraved on my poor child's headstone.

bringerofnoise · 26-04-2008, 12:00

When in prison you should be made to do soul breaking, body breaking, pointless things so that by the first week your trying to top your self with no way out then a year sentence would act like a deterrent.

If your a crack head even better because you get to cold turkey whilst doing it, not "aaww he has an addiction he needs help i know lets give him drugs

"

Vlad_Dracul · 26-04-2008, 19:04

Truth is its all lip service. It is a simple matter of economics. Jailing scum costs money and a lot of it. Keeping them on the streets costs less. Simple choice.

**Derek S** · 27-04-2008, 20:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Incognitas

How they were charged with manslaughter is beyond comprehension.

This explains it pretty well.

Basically to ensure convictions prosecutors are accepting guilty pleas to lesser charges rather than risk people getting away with it. It also has the added bonus of keeping the murder level down and not clogging up jails for long times with people. Why keep them in for 12-15 years when they can be out in 4 or 5.

Osem · 27-04-2008, 20:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Derek S

This explains it pretty well.

Basically to ensure convictions prosecutors are accepting guilty pleas to lesser charges rather than risk people getting away with it. It also has the added bonus of keeping the murder level down and not clogging up jails for long times with people. Why keep them in for 12-15 years when they can be out in 4 or 5.

Yep - that'd explain it

Xaccers · 27-04-2008, 20:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Derek S

This explains it pretty well.

Basically to ensure convictions prosecutors are accepting guilty pleas to lesser charges rather than risk people getting away with it. It also has the added bonus of keeping the murder level down and not clogging up jails for long times with people. Why keep them in for 12-15 years when they can be out in 4 or 5.

Hard choice, risk letting someone who's caused the death of another person get off, or have them put away for a shorter term, but still put away.
I can see in this case that a murder conviction would have been quite hard to get, as a group was involved, so while they contributed to the death, it's hard to say if the actions of each individual amounted to murder.

**Derek S** · 27-04-2008, 20:44

Although in some cases I'm aware of there was an abundance of evidence against the accused (excellent CCTV, multiple eyewitnesses, strong DNA, the accused still wearing the bloodstained clothing a few days later...) but culpable homicide pleas have been accepted instead of murder as 'they didn't mean to kill them'

Now I'm not a doctor but when the Scottish definition of murder includes the phrase
'a willful act so reckless as to show utter disregard for the consequences' I'd say stabbing someone in the neck, jumping up and down on their head or pushing them into a flooded quarry would count as murder.

Osem · 27-04-2008, 20:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Derek S

Although in some cases I'm aware of there was an abundance of evidence against the accused (excellent CCTV, multiple eyewitnesses, strong DNA, the accused still wearing the bloodstained clothing a few days later...) but culpable homicide pleas have been accepted instead of murder as 'they didn't mean to kill them'

Now I'm not a doctor but when the Scottish definition of murder includes the phrase
'a willful act so reckless as to show utter disregard for the consequences' I'd say stabbing someone in the neck, jumping up and down on their head or pushing them into a flooded quarry would count as murder.