Is 4 years enough

[McMouse]

for a lying cop?

[jake-the-peg]

Well Aitkin is a good benchmark

Person in authority, done for perverting - he got 18 months

This case is worse because he was trying to fit up a particular person rather than just trying to evade a libel trial

So yes I'd say 4 years is about the mark

[jno]

slightly odd charge, really, perverting the course of justice - I think it's mainly aimed at attempts to intimidate jurors or bribe witnesses (the latter was sort of what happened with Aitken), and it's that sort of thing that would attract higher sentences. Four years seems okay. It's not as if he's going to be a danger to the public when he gets out, though I wouldn't look for work running his website.

[modeller]

Most of the sentences meted out in this country are far too lenient and when you realise they only serve half the period it's hardly surprising that prison is not much of a deterrent. I remember a young tearaway saying to me before going into detention he was frightened of the prospect but after coming out and I use his words " It was a piece of cake ".

[jake-the-peg]

Not another one on the deterrant bandwagon!

News flash ! - Deterrants don't work when people don't think they're going to get caught!

Knee jerk reaction is to call for harsher sentensing

Yep if something isn't working - just try doing it harder - works every time

[Sandy-Wroe]

Did any of the cops who lied the Birmingham 6 and the Guildford 4 into life sentences ever see the inside of a cell?
4 years for a brawl in a restaurant, and its consequences, seems a mite excessive.

[jake-the-peg]

oh and modeller - youth detention or open prisons are a damn different thing to a victorian prison!

There are people on here who've seen the inside of one (not by choice) they tell a very different tale.

You should be wary of jumping to conclusions based on what some tearaway says

[modeller]

I wasn't only basing it on that experience similar remarks have been made on TV and last year an ex-con made similar remarks. The term Victorian Prison is an emotive term There is no comparison in food and accomodation neither did they enjoy TVs or the equivalent in their cells . I accept that is also an emotive and simplistic remark.

[suzie1]

i liked that cop

[buildersmate]

Why?

[Teleph0ne]

I think the loss of position, salary, 4 years in prison and the crap he will have to put up with in there will be enough to teach him a lesson, it's not like he will get the oppurtunity to re-offend!

[lilsecret]

The justice system would work better if the minimum sentences were increased rather than the maximum.

[suzie1]

hes alright looking thats why? tsk

[suzie1]

and everyone is crupt these days, so im not surprised a cop can be like that, there are many more, i tell you...cops who are crupt (how do you spell crupt)

[Teleph0ne]

to a true criminal, prison is more of an inconvenience than a deterant so theres no point increasing the sentences because they are treated so well in there, they get fed, looked after, televisions in their cells etc they are better off than a man on the dole! this copper though will really suffer by losing his freedom

[suzie1]

oh and he'll get it in the butt, coz hes a cop

[Teleph0ne]

he's knackered whichever way you look at it, he will either be with the paedo's if he is considered to be at risk or with the rest of them getting abuse 24hrs if not, that isn't a choice I would like to face!

[suzie1]

me neither telephone

[Teleph0ne]

he is a true example of prison being a harsh punishment, even a few weeks in there would be hell for him. his lifestyle etc will all have gone when he is released, most of his friends wont be associated with him, no job or pension, and 4 years inside, thats a hell of a lot to lose, what a mistake to make!

[fredpuli47]

4 years is actually a lot for 'perverting the course'.The cases in Archbold (lawyers' bible ) don't suggest any more than 2 years.He deserved 4 or 5 years .He's not some aggrieved villain falsely 'grassing' on someone he doesn't like or some woman misguidedly protecting her guilty boyfriend.Hhe's a top man in the police setting out to frame an innocent man on quite a serious charge.He was patently prepared to tell lies on oath in court and fabricate evidence of injury to do it.

By the way life never was an option in our history for this offence. Someone's misunderstood.It's a common law offence [one created by judges over centuries.not by Parliament in an Act] and there's never been any type of sentence, fine or anything, laid down in an Act. Judges just did what precedent from other judges suggested in sentencing.But it was classified as a misdemeanour , a lesser offence, not a felony, a major offence, so the sentences be at a lower level than for felonies