Sentencing gone barmy

[fbg40]

5 Years for systematically killing a 3 year old epileptic toddler ? Can be released after 2.5 years on licence ? The world has gone mad. There, I've got it off of my chest !! Sorry.
FBG40

[ummmm]

Have you got a link?

[Mamyalynne]

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/eltham-toyboy-cameron-rose-who-killed-lovers-son-3-jailed-for-five-years-8367919.html

[sir.prize]

And who does one blame for the barmy sentencing?

[FredPuli43]

It is a bit on the light side, even though he was acquitted of murder, and therefore of s18 gbh with intent (which is inherent in a murder count).Blame the jury for that. How they found that a defendant who did the acts described did so without intending really serious bodily harm to such a young victim is a mystery. But once they had, the judge was confined, at least by precedent and sentencing guidelines, to pass a sentence of this order. They don't always do that. There are cases, usually when the defendant has succeeded with the statutory defence of diminished responsibility in murder, and thus is convicted of manslaughter only, where the judge has passed a sentence as near as possible to a sentence for murder.

[fbg40]

Sir Prize
Who does one blame for barmy sentencing ? Not really sure to be honest. I realise that judges are bound to adhere to sentencing guidelines/laws, but I am of the opinion that these "laws" need revising.
FBG40

[sir.prize]

Precisely Fred. And as the OP suggests: Sentencing Gone Barmy. The whole system is ridiculous. Repeatedly there are amendments whereby the maximum sentences are increased. Surely the ideal would be to increase the minimum sentences.

[jno]

as I understand it, what FredPuli said was blame the jury. He got an a appropriate sentence for the offences he was found guilty of.

It's possible the jury heard slightly more of it than is in the papers, of course.

[FredPuli43]

Thinking back some 40 years, sir.prize, the sentence for a man who killed a baby with a single blow in temper, was 5 years, and that was typical then for such a manslaughter. The difference here is that this killing was part of a history of violence towards the child, not on the scale of horrific child cruelty but nonetheless not an isolated act of violence. The defendants are of a pattern though; time after time, the defendant is male, living with the mother, the child is not his and the child is killed by an act of violence which is committed in temper, often because the child is crying and that gets on the man's nerves.

[EDDIE51]

None of you seem to have grasped the main point. The offender was only 16 and was attending a school for emotionally disturbed youngsters. So we have a mentally unstable child to be considered . Under the circumstances there was not much scope for a longer sentence.

[sir.prize]

The 3 year old got a longer 'sentence'.

[youngmafbog]

Thats ok then, he's emotionally disturbed so lets let him out in a few years to continue his emotional problems on the public.

Rings of the Facebook killer. Wonder how many more deaths/rapes/attacks this person will commit before something is done.

If he is mentally unstable then should be locked up indefinitely until considerd well enough to be let loose on the public.

who's fault, maybe the jury but still a big element of liberal judging.

[jake-the-peg]

This is not a murder case but a manslaughter one - so systematically killing isn't really what he's been charged with

There's also a general principle that sentences are lighter when the accused is under 18 - I think that's probably not a bad principle, you may not.

Having said that the sentencing guidelines here http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/s_to_u/sentencing_manual/involuntary_manslaughter/ are interesting.

It's pointed out that the guidelines cover the widest band of sentencing for any offense.

I'd say the sentence wasn't unduely out of proportion with past precedent here.

You might think that actually a murder charge was warrented - if so then this would have been a "barmy" sentence.

Perhaps it's not the sentence that you should be objecting to here but the charge?

[hc4361]

I think the mother is culpable, too.

[emmie]

welcome to the club, i said much the same thing on another thread, case, and was told that i was wrong because of the sentence the man was given.
When will they start handing out much tougher sentences to child killers, and rapists.

[ummmm]

Completely different, Em.

[emmie]

of course it isn't. The child in question was 4 years old and will be damaged for life, the bstard who has gone to prison could be out one day, some say not, but no one knows that. This child was murdered, not manslaughter, i agree totally with fbg, the world has gone mad.

[hc4361]

Can we have a link to the case em10 is referring to, please?

[jake-the-peg]

So it sounds as if Em wants judges to ignore the charges put in front of them to decide on and try different charges

And then says the world has gone mad!

You don't suppose there's any chance that the CPS as legal professionals might know a bit more about the case and the suitable charges than a bunch of unqualified onlookers getting their information from the media do you?


Nah - that's crazy talk! - Of course we know best

[chelle7272]

hc this is the thread referred to
http://www.theanswerbank.co.uk/News/Question1192312.html