You Lucky Peeps Up There........
ChatterBank5 mins ago
Five Teenages Attack Fellow Tram Passengers, And Walk Free From Court.
31 Answers
http://
How is it possible for these young thugs to walk free, and since their three victims were Afghans why wasn't it also classes a racist attack?
/// Detective Constable Ostin Elkins, from British Transport Police, said: 'This was a callous, brutal and ultimately cowardly attack and we welcome the sentences handed down. ///
"We welcome the sentences handed down" surely he has to be joking?
How is it possible for these young thugs to walk free, and since their three victims were Afghans why wasn't it also classes a racist attack?
/// Detective Constable Ostin Elkins, from British Transport Police, said: 'This was a callous, brutal and ultimately cowardly attack and we welcome the sentences handed down. ///
"We welcome the sentences handed down" surely he has to be joking?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. 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.
Ridiculous. The gravity of the offence lies in three or more together using unlawful violence such that would cause anyone to fear for their own safety; there doesn't have to be anyone hurt; it's a public order offence, one down from riot(riot needs twelve people together). This case is made worse because this was a joint enterprise, the gang going armed and mob handed, the aim of which was to beat people up. That nobody suffered gbh is only matter of chance; the intent was there, though the group never succeeded in achieving it .
The maximum is 5 years. The court has a duty to take firm action against "packs of dogs", gangs intent on this kind of violence, to the fear of anyone who sees it. Custody should be inevitable, plea or no plea.
The maximum is 5 years. The court has a duty to take firm action against "packs of dogs", gangs intent on this kind of violence, to the fear of anyone who sees it. Custody should be inevitable, plea or no plea.
-- answer removed --
Birdie, there's a discount on a plea because 1)it saves a trial with the time and expense, and putting witnesses through what can be the ordeal of cross-examination 2) it is something of an inducement to the defendant, that he knows he'll get a lesser sentence 3) at least he's being honest for once; we still have the idea of a repenting sinner being a good thing.
I doubt it too, Svejk. When I started, I innocently asked my pupil master "What can you say for a defendant who has pleaded, or been found, guilty and there is nothing to say ?" He replied "Oh, there's always something to say. You can always say he's sorry. He's bound to be sorry that he has been caught!"
Mitigation always follows a set pattern, with the same sentences cropping up: "He has a job starting on Thursday", "His girlfriend is standing by him" etc. I did suggest that these should be numbered, to save time: "Your Honour, the mitigation is number 6, with a touch of 7, closing on 3". Unfortunately, the Bar never took this up.
Mitigation always follows a set pattern, with the same sentences cropping up: "He has a job starting on Thursday", "His girlfriend is standing by him" etc. I did suggest that these should be numbered, to save time: "Your Honour, the mitigation is number 6, with a touch of 7, closing on 3". Unfortunately, the Bar never took this up.
-- answer removed --
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.