Rot In Hell C***

[The Wookiee]

Rot In Hell C*nt

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/southern_counties/4926482.stm

5 years 7 months

This wanker should be killed

 

[BUTTERBALL]

Re: Rot In Hell C*nt

This wanker should be killed

I will personally volunteer - why are people like this allowed to remain on this planet?

 

[The Wookiee]

This animal will be out again in 5 years 7 months, lets hope he has an 'accident' in prison.

 

[bhaexpress]

The guy has previous, sorry it should have been life as lets face it, he'll be out in about three with good behaviour which leaves him easily young enough to offend again.

 

[vulture]

This animal will be out again in 5 years 7 months, lets hope he has an 'accident' in prison.

Or when he comes out.People like him should have their bollocks cut off and made to wear clothing to warn the public of what scum they are

 

[perth seagull]

How does a repeat offender get off so lightly?

 

[Barrel of Fun]

How does a repeat offender get off so lightly?

Human rights?

No idea.

Sort it out Clarke!!!

 

[eastlondonseagull]

Who thinks up these penalties? How can he get five years and yet that soldier who was court-martialled for refusing to go to Iraq got six months?

I know one's a military court etc, but punishments seem so arbitrary.

 

[SK1NT]

how could a lawyer even defend an evil bastard like that

 

[The Wookiee]

The report in todays Argus about this put me off my lunchtime pint, this animal should be put down in the most inhumane way possible

 

[Les Biehn]

5 years and 7 months doeas seem unbelievably light considering he has basically ruined that girls life. I would imagine he might be in for a pretty rough time if the other cons get hold of him. Shame.

 

[Vlad the Impala]

The report in todays Argus about this put me off my lunchtime pint, this animal should be put down in the most inhumane way possible

And that makes you better than him how?

 

[Mustela Furo]

5 years 7 months is the sentence ?

I was assuming that was the age of the girl when it started

quote from the article "The abuse started when the girl was aged about six and continued up until two weeks before his arrest in November 2005."

This is a ridiculously light sentence for a crime of this magnitude

I give him about 5 hours 7 minutes before he gets the treatment he deserves inside

 

[Lady Whistledown]

As I understand it, the reason for the relatively light sentence is because he had no previous for violent offences.

He only had conviction (s?) for possession of child porn. Under the law though, rape can get a sentence of life, and in this case there can be absolutely no mitigating circumstances (ie consent issues, didn't know the age of the victim, etc).

Unbelievable, and highly depressing for all of us, let alone people who have themselves been victims of such offences. And people wonder why so many genuine rape victims never come forward- why would you put yourself through the agony of reliving something like that in court, just to see him jailed for a mere 5 years??

 

[looney]

Soft on crime soft on the causes of crime.

They'll be out at the next election.

 

[clippedgull]

Soft on crime soft on the causes of crime.

They'll be out at the next election.

They won't . People remember the Tories.

 

[Gritt23]

I know this may sound a tad barbaric, but hear me out. I think the sentence for such crimes should include a period of time locked in a room with the victim, or family of the victim, or representative of the victim.

They then get a set amount of time to beat the living crap out of the guy.

Not only would this seem a fair punishment, but it also gives the family a fair target for the huge anger they must be feeling. As it is, you see countless family break-up completely following these sorts of crimes. Why? Because they cannot deal with the hurt and anger they feel, they take it out on each other, because the real criminal isn't around to have it taken out on.

Or they track the guy down once he's been released and beat the crap out of him, BUT would get charged for the offense.

So give them the real criminal. 30 mins, lock the door, turn a blind eye to whatever they do. Sorted.

 

[looney]

They won't . People remember the Tories.

and how crime fell under Howard, the only downward trend in the last 40 years.

 

[clippedgull]

and how crime fell under Howard, the only downward trend in the last 40 years. [/QUOTE

Yet when he was leader, they had the worst poll result in generations.

Rose coloured glasses

I'm not saying Labour are the answer, but i'm 100% certain the tories are not and Labour win by default.

Anyway this isn't a political thread

 

[Da Man Clay]

I know this may sound a tad barbaric, but hear me out. I think the sentence for such crimes should include a period of time locked in a room with the victim, or family of the victim, or representative of the victim.

They then get a set amount of time to beat the living crap out of the guy.

Not only would this seem a fair punishment, but it also gives the family a fair target for the huge anger they must be feeling. As it is, you see countless family break-up completely following these sorts of crimes. Why? Because they cannot deal with the hurt and anger they feel, they take it out on each other, because the real criminal isn't around to have it taken out on.

Or they track the guy down once he's been released and beat the crap out of him, BUT would get charged for the offense.

So give them the real criminal. 30 mins, lock the door, turn a blind eye to whatever they do. Sorted.

I think if you gave the family 3 minutes with the guy they would kill him let alone 30. Quite right to.