Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
O/t Stuart Hall
- Thread starter Lenny Rider
- Start date
del strangefish
Booooo!
Wearing a giant papermache head no doubt.
Bet you're glad the Royal Mail is a ****ing disaster!
He's got off very lightly there !
Should have got at least another 12 months for putting forward this mitigation :
"Hall's barrister Crispin Aylett, in mitigation, told the court the former broadcaster had "all of 13" victims compared to Jimmy Savile's 1,300."
Should have got at least another 12 months for putting forward this mitigation :
"Hall's barrister Crispin Aylett, in mitigation, told the court the former broadcaster had "all of 13" victims compared to Jimmy Savile's 1,300."
El Sid
Well-known member
He's ended up with about 5 weeks inside for each victim.
Mental!
Mental!
Poyetry In Motion
Pooetry Motions
I've no idea what that means, but it sounds painful
Barrel of Fun
Abort, retry, fail
I wanted to become a barrister, when I was much younger, but I'm not sure it is a job I could do.
Brian Fantana
Well-known member
My wife is, but luckily she doesn't do criminal cases. I'd find it a real struggle to separate the emotion and morality of it all from the need to defend your client.
spring hall convert
Well-known member
I'm lost for words on that quote, it's an outrageous thing to say but I suppose he is making his money defending serial paedophiles so we shouldn't be too shocked.
There are Nazi war criminals that haven't come to trial, does that mean we should let Ian Huntley out?
Watch the film "The Devil's Advocate" and I think it would stop almost anyone ever become a criminal defence barrister !!!!
brightonmark1234
Well-known member
shocking should never be aloud out
spring hall convert
Well-known member
The more I think about it the angrier I get. How is only abusing 13 people any form of mitigation? Right, I'm off for a lie down.
dougdeep
New member
Jailed for 15 months. Sounds a little lightweight to me.
martyn20
Unwell but still smiling
Should have been 15 years, what kind of message does this send out to victims and offenders?
The judge's summary: http://www.courtnewsuk.co.uk/?news_id=33371
The abuse itself is described. Some of it is not the sort of thing that you would expect to necessarily get a jail sentence (over clothes fondling of 16-17 year olds). The worst incident would get a maximum 5 years today, with the few incidents that cross the custodial thresh hold mostly getting a maximum of 2 years, but the incidents took place between 1967-87, with no guidelines for how to approach.
Pleading guilty spares the victims having to testify, so is mitigation. However, this itself didn't come at the earliest opportunity, and his public proclamations of innocence were also considered.
Other factors considered
-He is 83 with no previous convictions
-The last of the crimes he was indicted for took place 25 years ago
-He said sorry (seriously, read the link)
-Wife's ill health (not special enough in itself, but added to the overall equation)
-He indicated he had given up alcohol in 1986, and chose to be celibate, and there has been no evidence of offence since
-Charitable work, good character references
NB: This is for info purposes, not my justification.
The abuse itself is described. Some of it is not the sort of thing that you would expect to necessarily get a jail sentence (over clothes fondling of 16-17 year olds). The worst incident would get a maximum 5 years today, with the few incidents that cross the custodial thresh hold mostly getting a maximum of 2 years, but the incidents took place between 1967-87, with no guidelines for how to approach.
Pleading guilty spares the victims having to testify, so is mitigation. However, this itself didn't come at the earliest opportunity, and his public proclamations of innocence were also considered.
Other factors considered
-He is 83 with no previous convictions
-The last of the crimes he was indicted for took place 25 years ago
-He said sorry (seriously, read the link)
-Wife's ill health (not special enough in itself, but added to the overall equation)
-He indicated he had given up alcohol in 1986, and chose to be celibate, and there has been no evidence of offence since
-Charitable work, good character references
This is by no means the worst example of sexual abuse of children to come before the Court, but notwithstanding the mitigation I have come to the conclusion that taken together these offences do call for a sentence of imprisonment which must be served immediately. The repeated sexual abuse of young children, too young to consent and in no position to resist your advances, even if the individual acts are relatively mild, is a serious crime and it must be made clear to anyone tempted to take advantage of young children and other vulnerable victims that they face condemnation and punishment.
I have considered whether consecutive sentences should be imposed. Undoubtedly applying general sentencing principles consecutive sentences could properly be imposed, but balanced against that is the need for the court to consider the principle of totality. I have come to the conclusion that in the circumstances of this case it is most appropriate to decide a sentence which reflects the totality of your offending and pass concurrent sentences for all matters distinguishing between the offences within the total sentence to reflect their relative seriousness. This also enables me to pass appropriate sentences for the more serious offences rather than to pass shorter sentences for each offence which would not reflect their individual seriousness if there were consecutive sentences, taking into account totality.
The mitigation has been taken into account by me in determining the appropriate starting point for sentence after a trial and I have reduced that starting point significantly, but the least sentence overall that is in my view appropriate after a trial taking all those factors into account would be a sentence of 20 months imprisonment. I shall reduce that to 15 months in all to give the credit for the plea of guilty in accordance with the Guidelines for pleas of guilty and the time the pleas were entered for the reasons I have indicated earlier. I have, accordingly reduced each sentence by 25% to give that degree of credit for your pleas of guilty.
I have considered whether consecutive sentences should be imposed. Undoubtedly applying general sentencing principles consecutive sentences could properly be imposed, but balanced against that is the need for the court to consider the principle of totality. I have come to the conclusion that in the circumstances of this case it is most appropriate to decide a sentence which reflects the totality of your offending and pass concurrent sentences for all matters distinguishing between the offences within the total sentence to reflect their relative seriousness. This also enables me to pass appropriate sentences for the more serious offences rather than to pass shorter sentences for each offence which would not reflect their individual seriousness if there were consecutive sentences, taking into account totality.
The mitigation has been taken into account by me in determining the appropriate starting point for sentence after a trial and I have reduced that starting point significantly, but the least sentence overall that is in my view appropriate after a trial taking all those factors into account would be a sentence of 20 months imprisonment. I shall reduce that to 15 months in all to give the credit for the plea of guilty in accordance with the Guidelines for pleas of guilty and the time the pleas were entered for the reasons I have indicated earlier. I have, accordingly reduced each sentence by 25% to give that degree of credit for your pleas of guilty.
NB: This is for info purposes, not my justification.
Last edited:
He was sentenced to:
For Count 1 - 6 months imprisonment
For Counts 2-4 - 3 months imprisonment on each count concurrent
For Count 6 - 15 months imprisonment concurrent
For Counts 10 and 11 – 6 months imprisonment on each count concurrent
For Counts 12, 13 and 14 – 9 months imprisonment on each count concurrent
For Count 15 – 15 months imprisonment concurrent
For Count 16 – 15 months imprisonment concurrent
For Count 17 – 6 months imprisonment concurrent
For Count 18 - 9 months imprisonment concurrent
114 months, but they all overlap, i.e. the three months he serves for count 2, will be the same 3 months he serves for count 3 and 4.
For Count 1 - 6 months imprisonment
For Counts 2-4 - 3 months imprisonment on each count concurrent
For Count 6 - 15 months imprisonment concurrent
For Counts 10 and 11 – 6 months imprisonment on each count concurrent
For Counts 12, 13 and 14 – 9 months imprisonment on each count concurrent
For Count 15 – 15 months imprisonment concurrent
For Count 16 – 15 months imprisonment concurrent
For Count 17 – 6 months imprisonment concurrent
For Count 18 - 9 months imprisonment concurrent
114 months, but they all overlap, i.e. the three months he serves for count 2, will be the same 3 months he serves for count 3 and 4.
martyn20
Unwell but still smiling
One thing though if this the type of sentence you get for doing this to children maybe some of the other accused 'celebs' will also plead guilty and save the victims from having to appear in court. Desperately trying to find the good side of this disgusting sentencing outcome.
martyn20
Unwell but still smiling
The AG is going to examine if the sentence was 'unduly lenient'.....good
Nibble
New member
- Jan 3, 2007
- 19,238
My belief is that if you are done for sexual abuse of a minor and you are found guilty, straight away, without considering anything, your guilty plea, your mitigation, etc etc, straight away, 10 years. That's just a given. A minimum. Then anything above that 10 year minimum can be bargained for, discussed etc etc but first off you get found guilty of child molestation, 10 years, no parole, Bang, a decade.