Re: Riots
 

Yes in my mind life means life and not a 10 year sentence.

---------- Post added at 19:29 ---------- Previous post was at 19:27 ----------

A more hardline sentencing approach rather then the wishy washy wooly Liberal approach.

---------- Post added at 19:30 ---------- Previous post was at 19:29 ----------

Well l cannot fly abroad because of my medical condition.:D

Re: Riots
 

But the Government has not changed sentencing laws. It hasn't even amended guidance so far as I am aware.

You and Marty are applauding the courts, not the government - it is the courts that are handing down sentences, and they are doing it based on precisely the same laws and guidelines that they were using 2 weeks ago, before any riots kicked off.

Nothing has changed.

Re: Riots
 

So why is it that in todays newspaper the coalition will go ahead and cut a further 18.000 cops, what will that achieve,

We need MORE police on the streets, not less.

Re: Riots
 

They have upped the anti Chris ,before the riots stealing a bottle of water or wearing a pair of stolen shorts that the wearer did not steal would not have resulted in jail sentences ,quite possibly neither would some of the more serious crimes such as the assaults that happened.Now the government have done this they need to continue in the following months and years

Re: Riots
 

The government haven't done anything ... See my post above from a couple of minutes ago.

Re: Riots
 

So you are saying that David has not had a word in their ear then.

Re: Riots
 

As that would be grossly unconstitutional, I think it safe to assert that the Prime Minister has not privately tried to influence the sentencing procedure of any individual trial, or of trials collectively.

He has of course publicly applauded the decisions that the courts have taken, whilst being very careful always to point out that these are decisions for the courts alone.

Re: Riots
 

are you honestly telling that 2 or 3 weeks ago a woman wearing a pair of stolen shorts that she didn't steal would have got jail .The 2 lads that got 4 yrs for inciting a riot (i agree with the sentence by the way) would not have got that 3 weeks ago .Regular shop lifters don't get jail very often but someone stealing a bottle of water gets 9 months .I know that judges have always had these sentencing powers (for instance inciting a riot could get you 10yrs),for these type of crimes but rarely use them to this extent ,now because of the riots the government has told the courts to have night courts to process the criminals quicker and use their full sentencing powers .Why couldn't the government have done this before ?and will they continue?

Re: Riots
 

Yes it would be unconstitutional but he has stated that there would be severe sentences for those rioting and l am sure magistrates and judges unless they are in Timbuktu have listened or heard these remarks through the media and have took them on board and l am all for these people getting the sentences that they deserve.

Re: Riots
 

Let me join you because it would be like having Gordon Brown back in charge.

Re: Riots
 

Well something has changed. While the Judges will be sentencing according to existing guidelines I don't believe they would handed down these prison terms for the same crimes had they taken place outside of the riots. As I already said this is somewhat good, they should take into account that by participating in these riots they are helping fuel the flames for further disorder. Every one person joining in made it easier for the next to do so.

However I still think they punishments are excessive. I don't see why someone should see the inside of a prison cell for handling stolen goods or 4 years in jail for trying to start a riot via Facebook.

Re: Riots
 

I am saying nothing of the sort.

The fact that the courts are handing out stiffer sentences to rioters does not prove that the government has changed the law or the guidance that governs sentencing.

And that really is all there is to it.

---------- Post added at 19:57 ---------- Previous post was at 19:49 ----------

Who is saying otherwise? Of course context is important. Unfortunately some people have jumped to the entirely illogical conclusion that the way the courts are sentencing rioters/looters must necessarily be due to some active government participation. If true, that would be a scandal of a magnitude big enough to bring the government down.

Government can influence the courts by setting down offences and punishments in law but it cannot act to influence a case, or cases, in specific circumstances. All members of the government can do is make loud - and public - noises about the courts making use of the powers they already have, whilst carefully re-stating their intention not to unduly influence proceedings.

Ladies and gentlemen, what we are seeing this week are magistrates and circuit judges up and down the UK noting the public fear and outrage and sending some very stern messages intended to stop it happening again. Nothing more, nothing less.

Nevertheless, if a sentence is arguably too harsh, even in the context of the recent riots, the appeals process remains available to any who wish to use it.

Re: Riots
 

well i've never said they changed the law ,but as Damien said ,all of a sudden the courts are being tougher and i feel they are setting a precedent for future criminals ,and i do applaud that as long as they stick to it ,and as unconstitutional as it would be i do beleive that Cameron or at least members of his government have had a quiet word behind closed doors

Re: Riots
 

They have noted the public fear and outrage, and the demand for harsh treatment that has come from all sections of society - ministers included. They are entitled to take public outrage into account when sentencing, and they have done so. Doubtless they have heard what Cameron has said, and have correctly seen his comments for what they are - a reflection of that same public outrage.

All of this is a very different proposition than suggesting these sentences are somehow the Government's doing, either by changing the law at lightning speed or by trying quietly to abuse the historic independence of our justice system.

Re: Riots
 

It's a very fine line that the government are walking though Chris .How many times does Cameron have to say "rioters will be punished to the full extent of the law"before that is taken as a instruction to the courts ,as it sounded like to me when he spoke outside downing st on 9th august, either a poor choice of words or he knows that they will be punished to the full extent of the law