Quote from: David McKeown on April 13, 2024, 12:42:49 PMJust one of the acts carries a life sentence. If a proper sentence was frivolously appealed then that would be a problem that needs further addressing later. The fix is most certainly not to allow judges threat scum like this with kiddy gloves and let them walk in 40 odd months time. Jesus Christ this filth is an absolute menace.Quote from: Look-Up! on April 13, 2024, 10:32:41 AMWhat utter nonsense. As if the judiciary give a crap about the tax payer when they're billing their time! And they're well fit to throw the book at people if they've gotten out of the wrong side of the bed for trivial crap.
This sc**bag raped a baby, filmed it, put it up on a sharing platform and would not co-operate with authorities in naming his buddies. The book should be thrown at him. If some p***k in government then wants to take issue with that and over rule the judge, I doubt they'd be too popular or get very far.
There are not too many crimes as stomach churning or vile as this one. Letting him walk in 4 years is a complete insult and more retraumatizing to the victims than anything that could have been said in court. And if we've lowered ourselves to the point of affording credit to the most depraved of paedos so as not to upset them, then the lunatics are truly running the asylum.
I am in no way defending the sentence. It is reprehensible. The problem is. The judge does what you suggest and goes against the guidance from government and it's an easy and costly appeal with the potential for damages, further suffering for victims and further ridicule. Had this sentence been imposed in the north it would have been at the lower end of the guidance but still within the guidance. So in such a scenario was the Judge wrong to follow the guidance or is the guidance wrong? Clearly the guidance is wrong and therefore the criticism of the judiciary is largely misplaced.
Also individual politicians or even ministers or governments can't really over rule judges in particular cases. Parliament can of course amend the law but by and large in criminal matters this can't have retrospective effect. But the law has developed over many years to water down or eradicate the executives role in judicial matters. Save for providing guidance on sentences which should be followed.
I'd be willing to bet my life that if there was the remotest possibility this POS was going to be next door neighbour to that judge, the sentence would be very different.