Student rioter - going down

[BLOCK F]

Very foolish action by this young man and one that he will,no doubt, regret for the rest of his life.The consequences of his actions may seriously affect his future education and employment opportunities.
He is without doubt being punished as an example to others and I believe his sentence is excessive.
I hope for his sake that he will be given a 'second chance' and makes a success of his life.

 

[Stoo82]

Sentance is about right for the crime. As others have said though, compared with other sentances, it does seem harsh. I'm happy with what he got though. Just wish all the others got what they deserve too.

 

[KneeOn]

LET HIM FREE. I totally 100% support him and all that leftie stuff

Seriously, the above posters are spot on. He may have killed some one, which is punishable. But with this sentance? He's given him self up and has no previous convictions! On top of that, Brian Fantana was spot on, 4 months for actually killing a little girl v 32 months for throwing a fire extinguisher off the top of a building.

Not defending him or his actions but you can see how and why he did it. He's angry. on a roof and caught up. No excuse but surely also not worth 32 months of his life given no one died?

 

[somerset]

A lot of holier than thou people on here. I'm not condoning his actions at all, but wonder if the punishment is disproportionate?

Consider your throat well jumped down,...... get a grip mate,.... its a no fookin brainer,..... there is no context or proportion to measure against, it was attempted murder,... and he didn't give himself up willingly, he was coerced by his mother,.. otherwise he would still be having a cosy student style lie-in even now as I write.

 

[tubaman]

There is no sense left in the criminal justice system. It is already broken but nobody is prepared to admit it. One of the fundamental failures are the sentencing guidelines. You can't imprison somebody if there is nowhere to place them! and why keep trying to give the impression that the authorities are being tough by stating that long prison sentences are being handed out when we all know that a prisoner will only serve half the sentence? At the end of the day this offence (violent disorder) is an ofence of violence so will / should always be considered more serious than an offence were there is only a potential for injury or harm. Eg driving without due care and attention where a death is involved as opposed to causing death by careless driving. sounds like the kid comes from a good family which is a bit unfortunate. would have said he deserves it if this was not a one off and he had made the investigation difficult.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Consider your throat well jumped down,...... get a grip mate,.... its a no fookin brainer,..... there is no context or proportion to measure against, it was attempted murder,... and he didn't give himself up willingly, he was coerced by his mother,.. otherwise he would still be having a cosy student style lie-in even now as I write.

British Common Law is founded on context and precedent my learned friend going back 800 years, therefore your statement couldn't be more wrong! Why don't you read my post again as I certainly wasn't suggesting he should go unpunished.

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

If someone goes into a shopping mall with a rifle and tries to shoot someone but doesn't because he is a shit shot does that mean he should not go down ?. The fact he did not kill anyone is a miracle and just a complete fluke. Heat of the moment ?. Bollocks. He should have gone down. Well done the Judge.

 

[Brian Fantana]

If someone goes into a shopping mall with a rifle and tries to shoot someone but doesn't because he is a shit shot does that mean he should not go down. The fact he did not kill anyone is a miracle and just a complete fluke. Heat of the moment ?. Bollocks. He should have gone down. Well done the Judge.

I don't think anyone is questioning that he deserved to go to prison. It just seems a bit strange that one person gets 4 months in jail for actually killing someone and another person gets a sentence eight times longer for nearly killing someone. Logic?

 

[Cheeky Monkey]

Must surely regret giving himself up, unless he was sure he'd be identified from footage taken on the day.

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

Because the legal system is f***ed up. I think the sentance is the right one. Maybe it will put some of the other pampered students off kicking things in and behaving like complete bell ends because they have to put something back into the system. Hey considered getting a job in the evenings and weekends on the tills to help pay your way ?. Nah , would rather go to the cheap Uni bar and get pissed and then stagger to a party until 7am. There are some students who go for the education and work hard but tbh 80% of them go because there is nothing else to do, the cheap booze, endless parties and shagging opportunities. Good luck to them, but come on at least be honest with yourselves.

 

[Simster]

Must surely regret giving himself up, unless he was sure he'd be identified from footage taken on the day.

This is the thing. How many other people who do silly things in the heat of the moment (with no real consequence) are going to feel compelled to give themselves up?

 

[Billy the Fish]

32 months does seem a bit harsh, that's almost 3 years FFS. Usually first offence and previous good character is a get out of jail free card. This is a sentence to keep the media and politicians happy, which is out of order.

As others have said, you can do a voilent robbery and get less than that.

 

[Sussex Nomad]

Perhaps the judge sent him down in the 'heat of the moment'! I'm glad he got custodial, it is the ultimate deterrent to such people. However I think it would have been better served at maybe 3 months custodial to scare the living crap out of him and then maybe a couple of years community service, suspended sentence, ban on marches, even curfew, visits to a probation officer, you know the sort of thing, just heap it all on him to curb his rights to a normal life as punishment?

 

[Bold Seagull]

Because the legal system is f***ed up. I think the sentance is the right one. Maybe it will put some of the other pampered students off kicking things in and behaving like complete bell ends because they have to put something back into the system. Hey considered getting a job in the evenings and weekends on the tills to help pay your way ?. Nah , would rather go to the cheap Uni bar and get pissed and then stagger to a party until 7am. There are some students who go for the education and work hard but tbh 80% of them go because there is nothing else to do, the cheap booze, endless parties and shagging opportunities. Good luck to them, but come on at least be honest with yourselves.

What has any of that got to do with the justification of his sentence in comparison to his crime? If you believe this sentence is the right one, then how does this relate to say the sentencing for carrying a knife, which MP's have recently rejected a call for a minimum 6 month jail term? This was a Conservative election pledge which they are now not going through with. I would consider someone leaving their home carrying a knife a far greater indictment of someone wanting to cause harm, then a snotty nosed student who has never been in trouble before, grabbing the nearest object and throwing into an empty space below. I don't for a second believe he wanted to hit anyone, even though clearly he could have done.

When you say be honest with yourselves, what do you mean? I haven't seen any comments that have suggested he shouldn't be punished, but he also shouldn't also be punished for the excesses of others which is what you appear to be suggesting.

 

[brightonlass2009]

It's all about intent, which is why you can't really compare speeding crimes with crimes such as this. In the case of speeding the law will see it that you did not intend to kill somebody, hence why the punishments are lesser. For a crime like this, in the eyes of the law, he had the intent to kill or injure somebody, hence why the punishment is equal to, or higher than, that of somebody killing another person via speeding. Basically Violent disorder is a higher offence, which is what people need to face.

Anyways, back to original question. I think a custodial sentence is the only way to go with this. I'm glad he was imprisoned. The only issue I have is he will now be eligible for education within prison. Which I don't believe is correct as the right to education is only until the age of 18, but that's probably a different matter entirely.

 

[keaton]

If someone goes into a shopping mall with a rifle and tries to shoot someone but doesn't because he is a shit shot does that mean he should not go down ?. The fact he did not kill anyone is a miracle and just a complete fluke. Heat of the moment ?. Bollocks. He should have gone down. Well done the Judge.

It would be pretty difficult to argue it was a spur of the moment thing if he took a rifle into a shopping 'mall' (are you a yank now?) and then started shooting

 

[The Spanish]

bear in mind there are other marches planned that are a huge drain on finances and resources. this sentence is going to scare the crap out of a large number of potential attendees.

 

[somerset]

32 months does seem a bit harsh, that's almost 3 years FFS. Usually first offence and previous good character is a get out of jail free card. This is a sentence to keep the media and politicians happy, which is out of order.

As others have said, you can do a voilent robbery and get less than that.

What are you talking about man,... he had the item in his hands for a full 2 mins before deciding what to do with it,.. and that decision was to throw it down on top of the police directly below missing by 2 feet only..... now as is said in a comment earlier, if you have a shot at someone with a gun but narrowly miss, does that lessen the seriousness of the offence?

This is a sentance to deter other cretins from doing the same, I hope some of thos idiots throwing fireworks at police horses also get good sentances to reflect how serious the outcome could have been.

 

[somerset]

bear in mind there are other marches planned that are a huge drain on finances and resources. This sentence is going to scare the crap out of a large number of potential attendees.

good

 

[Buzzer]

British Common Law is founded on context and precedent my learned friend going back 800 years, therefore your statement couldn't be more wrong! Why don't you read my post again as I certainly wasn't suggesting he should go unpunished.

Except common law applies in the main to civil cases. This was a criminal matter brought by the state. He was found guilty of violent disorder and given a sentence in line with the tariffs laid down.

It's irrelevant that Johnny Immigrant got 4 months for mass murder in another court. The judge has to first bear in mind the tariff, the severity of his actions, the mitigating circumstances etc etc. He definitely should not take into account a sentence for a drunk driver. It would not be comparing like with like.

If you want context then some Brighton fans got longer sentences for the same crime except they were just luzzing plastic chairs at Leeds fans with little chance of serious damage. Bearing this in mind, Some could say this student got off lightly.