Latest of several such cases.

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.dailymail....Eid-celebrations.html

/// The five defendants laughed and smirked as the horrifying details of their offences were described in court yesterday. ///

/// Rashid – who had already been found guilty of two rapes, an attempted rape, child abduction and an attempted sexual assault – grinned, laughed and made gun gestures in the dock. ///

/// His supporters in the public gallery hurled abuse at the judge as he passed sentence later. ///

Due to their heinous crime and the fact that they obviously showed no remorse, by grinning, laughing and making gun gestures, shouldn't they have been given life sentences?

And shouldn't their friends in the public gallery also have been arrested for a Contempt of Court?

They were jailed for a total of just 38 years

One at 11 years, one at 10years, two at 8years and one at 15 months.

[jackthehat]

You cannot increase sentences because of reprehensible behaviour in court, I'm afraid.

[jno]

grinning in court is not an offence

[tonyav]

It bloody well would, if I was the judge jno.

[THECORBYLOON]

Anotheoldgit, I have asked you before to tell us what a racist is. Will you enlighten me?

[douglas9401]

The sentences make me wonder just what crime has to be committed to attract a prison term of any great length.

[tonyav]

Totally agree with what douglas9401 says.

[sir.prize]

douglas - a very good question considering . . .

''Rashid received ten years for child abduction, two rapes, an attempted rape and attempted sexual assault.'' He will probably do five and then be out to offend again

[anotheoldgit]

jackthehat

/// You cannot increase sentences because of reprehensible behaviour in court, I'm afraid. ///

He certainly could have done, the sentences had not been announced when this reprehensible behaviour took place.

Rape carries a maximum sentence of Life imprisonment, so he could have said, "by your behaviour in court it is obvious you make no apology neither have you shown any remorse, so in the circumstances I am going to impose the maximum sentence the law allows, life imprisonment, take them down".

Good riddance to bad rubbish.

[jackthehat]

The Judge will already have decided upon the sentence he was handing down before he was called upon to do so; having taken into account all the factors he decided were relevant.

Whether, then, adding a bit on for ' dumb insolence' is possible, or desirable, or legal, I am not sure.

[FredPuli43]

"What crime has to be committed to attract sentences of any great length"?
Well, shooting into a shop, maiming a little girl does, for one!
The judge already knew perfectly well that these defendants thought their crimes laughable if, indeed, they regarded them as crimes at all. They had treated this girls as objects. His remarks in sentencing expressed that view. What they did in the dock did not add anything to what he already knew and he sentenced accordingly. The sentences fell within guidelines. And they do 'send a message' to others in that community who might think the same of vulnerable girls as these defendants did.
Shouting by the gallery, such as this, is usually dealt with by "Silence in Court!", which generally works without further action. Friends and relations often have, and express, intense feelings of anger and contempt, which judges ignore for what they are. Like it or not, their friends, the defendants, are still going away, which is what really matters.

[chaptazbru]

Agree with douglas.

[emmie]

chapta, so do i, vile creatures.

[andy-hughes]

As advised AOG, playing up to the gallery - literally - is not a criminal offence in itself. It simply underlines the fact that these young men grow up in a culture, some sections of which devalue women, and in which conptempt for white women is considered the norm. Their swaggering contempt is entirely in line with the ethos they receive that as young men they are free to take what they want from the world, and there are no consequencs to their actions. Happily, UK law has been willing to point out that this attitude is not acceptable.

[mike11111]

This reminds of a case in 1960 of 4 young men aged 23, 19, 18 and 17 on trial for capital murder after the young man they mugged died from his injuries. They laughed and sniggered throughout the trial. They soon stopped sniggering when three of them were found guilty and the judge put on the black cap. There was no reprieve and the 23 and 18 year olds were hanged, the last 18 year old to be executed. No doubt their attitude in court swayed the Home Secretary when considering a reprieve.