ChatterBank4 mins ago
Whay can't we keep the scum locked up?
At least one of the lowlives should not have even been out to commit the awful crime on the French pair.
I don' give a rats arse about rehab and all that sh1t, plain and simple punishments, end of. Keep the scum locked up. I just cannot beileve the inneptitude of the people that decide to let people out of jail before their sentence is up. Life should mean life!
I don' give a rats arse about rehab and all that sh1t, plain and simple punishments, end of. Keep the scum locked up. I just cannot beileve the inneptitude of the people that decide to let people out of jail before their sentence is up. Life should mean life!
Answers
1 to 11 of 11
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by R1Geezer. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
In March 2003, aged 17, Sonnex admitted various robbery and violence charges and was sentenced to eight years in jail.
In prison he quickly emerged as a troublemaker and was involved in 41 separate incidents, including setting fire to his cell.
But by February 2008 he had reached the two-thirds point in his sentence and his release was mandatory.
Despite his history he was assessed as only medium risk to the public and it was agreed he would reside at his family home.
He walked free on 8 February 2008.
Three days later, the police were called to a flat after allegations he had tied up a man and woman and made threats.
Although the police investigated, the witnesses did not make any statements and no charges were brought. His probation officer gave him a verbal warning.
During this period, probation records show he complied with his appointments and usually arrived early. His behaviour was described as "polite".
But on 28 April 2008 he missed an appointment with his "offender manager" - the new name for probation officers - because he had been arrested in connection with handling stolen goods.
He was charged, remanded in custody by magistrates, and sent to Belmarsh prison in south-east London.
At that point the probation service started the process of rescinding Sonnex's licence and recalling him to prison to complete his original 2003 sentence.
But something went wrong.
On 16 May he was still in prison when he appeared again before magistrates. The BBC understands that the magistrate believed Sonnex's licence had been revoked, and he would be returning to prison.
On this basis, Sonnex was given "technical bail" and released since remanding him in custody would serve no purpose.
But the paperwork revoking his licence had not been completed.
The process was then subject to several weeks of delays, partly because probation officers did
In prison he quickly emerged as a troublemaker and was involved in 41 separate incidents, including setting fire to his cell.
But by February 2008 he had reached the two-thirds point in his sentence and his release was mandatory.
Despite his history he was assessed as only medium risk to the public and it was agreed he would reside at his family home.
He walked free on 8 February 2008.
Three days later, the police were called to a flat after allegations he had tied up a man and woman and made threats.
Although the police investigated, the witnesses did not make any statements and no charges were brought. His probation officer gave him a verbal warning.
During this period, probation records show he complied with his appointments and usually arrived early. His behaviour was described as "polite".
But on 28 April 2008 he missed an appointment with his "offender manager" - the new name for probation officers - because he had been arrested in connection with handling stolen goods.
He was charged, remanded in custody by magistrates, and sent to Belmarsh prison in south-east London.
At that point the probation service started the process of rescinding Sonnex's licence and recalling him to prison to complete his original 2003 sentence.
But something went wrong.
On 16 May he was still in prison when he appeared again before magistrates. The BBC understands that the magistrate believed Sonnex's licence had been revoked, and he would be returning to prison.
On this basis, Sonnex was given "technical bail" and released since remanding him in custody would serve no purpose.
But the paperwork revoking his licence had not been completed.
The process was then subject to several weeks of delays, partly because probation officers did
all very good Gromit, but he got 8 sme66ing years, so on what kin planet can release after 5 for bad behaviour be right? Ok so you dug up the rules, I'm not interested in the rules, they are plain wrong, it begs the question what do you have to do to actually have to serve the full sentence?
The whole thing is flawed, under Geezer law you get 8 yeare you do 8 years minumum, play up that's increased. Jails will be harsh not luck the currfent Butlins.
The whole thing is flawed, under Geezer law you get 8 yeare you do 8 years minumum, play up that's increased. Jails will be harsh not luck the currfent Butlins.
Sloppy work all round.
From the assessment that he was a medium risk, to the probation officer taking 5 weeks to fill in a form.
Tragically resulting in this dangerous man being on the streets when he should not have been.
The other case yesterday was the rapist Kirk Reid. Despite having his car model and registration number reported to the Police, they did not follow it up and he committed 20 further attacks.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7965809.stm
Again gross ineptitude left a dangerous man on the streets
From the assessment that he was a medium risk, to the probation officer taking 5 weeks to fill in a form.
Tragically resulting in this dangerous man being on the streets when he should not have been.
The other case yesterday was the rapist Kirk Reid. Despite having his car model and registration number reported to the Police, they did not follow it up and he committed 20 further attacks.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7965809.stm
Again gross ineptitude left a dangerous man on the streets
I don't understand how some people given "life" or lengthy sentences will never see the light of day again, i.e. Ian Brady, Rose West, Peter Sutcliffe, Dennis Neilson etc, whereas others, just as debased, are released after serving a token sentence.
Serious questions must be asked of those decision makers who continually make such erroneous judgements about monsters like Sonnex and others of his ilk. How he could be judged to be "medium risk" to the public, with his previous history, is mind blowing to say the least.
Our recent domestic history is littered with such examples of gross incompetence and systematic failures by people who are supposedly acting in the best interests of Joe Public. This outrage, little Victoria Klimbie, Baby Peter etc etc.
And what happens to them when these atrocities happen? We get lame excuses by some apologist keen to cloud the issue and divert responsibility anywhere except at those who are the most culpable. In the end, all we get is "lessons must be learnt", the usual bullsh*t which makes my blood boil! Because, seemingly, lessons never get learnt and we just stagger on regardless until the next disaster.
The days are long gone when we had effective deterrents to stop some of these outrages happening in the first place, and instead they've been replaced by so called decision makers so weak and wet that they're liable to drown in their own p*ss.
These examples make me believe that, in certain instances, the re-introduction of capital punishment might not be such a bad thing after all.
Serious questions must be asked of those decision makers who continually make such erroneous judgements about monsters like Sonnex and others of his ilk. How he could be judged to be "medium risk" to the public, with his previous history, is mind blowing to say the least.
Our recent domestic history is littered with such examples of gross incompetence and systematic failures by people who are supposedly acting in the best interests of Joe Public. This outrage, little Victoria Klimbie, Baby Peter etc etc.
And what happens to them when these atrocities happen? We get lame excuses by some apologist keen to cloud the issue and divert responsibility anywhere except at those who are the most culpable. In the end, all we get is "lessons must be learnt", the usual bullsh*t which makes my blood boil! Because, seemingly, lessons never get learnt and we just stagger on regardless until the next disaster.
The days are long gone when we had effective deterrents to stop some of these outrages happening in the first place, and instead they've been replaced by so called decision makers so weak and wet that they're liable to drown in their own p*ss.
These examples make me believe that, in certain instances, the re-introduction of capital punishment might not be such a bad thing after all.
R1, this scum and his scumbag family that intimidate otehrs should be strung up.
Usual lenghty cr*ap from Gromit. who cares about rules, espeically based on ooman rights for the criminal?
I really dispair, although on reflection perhaps adoptation of Sharia law could help. What I find amusing on this is how our lefty luvvies would react, against aptial punishment but mouslims must be respected.
A**hols the lot of them (lefty luvvies that is)
Usual lenghty cr*ap from Gromit. who cares about rules, espeically based on ooman rights for the criminal?
I really dispair, although on reflection perhaps adoptation of Sharia law could help. What I find amusing on this is how our lefty luvvies would react, against aptial punishment but mouslims must be respected.
A**hols the lot of them (lefty luvvies that is)
youngmafbog and R1
Ok so you dug up the rules, I'm not interested in the rules
and
Usual lenghty cr*ap from Gromit. who cares about rules, espeically based on ooman rights for the criminal?
I posted the story from the BBC, that is why it was in italics. They are not my words and facts, they are the BBCs report. I did this because you had failed to provide a link or any background to the story, and also gave the impression he had been let out from a life sentence.
I then followed up with my opinion which vaguely agreed with you. Sorry if the introduction of a little context spoilt your rants.
Dail Mail:
From the Probation Services failure to classify the savage Sonnex as high risk upon his release, to the stupefying decision by magistrates - backed, it seems, by the Crown Prosecution Service - that he should be bailed, to the police's complete inability to track him down when he was finally recalled to custody, everything that could possibly go wrong did so.
Magistrates, Police, CPS and Probation Service all to blame, and somehow in your warped mind you blame leftie luvvies.
Ok so you dug up the rules, I'm not interested in the rules
and
Usual lenghty cr*ap from Gromit. who cares about rules, espeically based on ooman rights for the criminal?
I posted the story from the BBC, that is why it was in italics. They are not my words and facts, they are the BBCs report. I did this because you had failed to provide a link or any background to the story, and also gave the impression he had been let out from a life sentence.
I then followed up with my opinion which vaguely agreed with you. Sorry if the introduction of a little context spoilt your rants.
Dail Mail:
From the Probation Services failure to classify the savage Sonnex as high risk upon his release, to the stupefying decision by magistrates - backed, it seems, by the Crown Prosecution Service - that he should be bailed, to the police's complete inability to track him down when he was finally recalled to custody, everything that could possibly go wrong did so.
Magistrates, Police, CPS and Probation Service all to blame, and somehow in your warped mind you blame leftie luvvies.
Tell me about it my friend. Take a look at my recent post in the criminal section "Justice"
I agree with you 100%
At one time the judicial system only really punished the money taking fraudsters and let the kiddie fiddlers and the violent criminals get off with ridiculous sentencing. Now that the banks and members of parliament have shown their true colours its likely that they will simply abolish jails and send everybody to work for suralan sugar. what a joke this government is.....
I agree with you 100%
At one time the judicial system only really punished the money taking fraudsters and let the kiddie fiddlers and the violent criminals get off with ridiculous sentencing. Now that the banks and members of parliament have shown their true colours its likely that they will simply abolish jails and send everybody to work for suralan sugar. what a joke this government is.....
1 to 11 of 11
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles6 mins ago
Home & Garden13 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles23 mins ago
News40 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.