"Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/l...re/7316601.stm

....and guess what? Yep, apparently some of those involved had been prosecuted for an earlier violent attack and been given a 6 month community sentence. :confused:

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co....h_baseball_bat

As for the parents of these thugs - well one mother thought it approporiate to smirk and snigger in court and during police interviews of her son.

It beggars belief doesn't it!

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

I'd consider myself a member of the 'alternative' fraternity; I wear baggy jeans, have short spiky hair, animal/quicksilver/band name hoody and the names I've been called by gangs of teens when walking through parks would make a navvy blush. I've personally never been the victim of violence but quite a few of my friends have.

I was appalled but not particularly surprised when this happened. Human beings attack the different almost by their very nature but the lack of values structure in these youths is staggering.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

True. The really worrying thing is the serious and prolonged nature of the violence being used - shooting/stabbing eachother for a so-called minor lack of respect incident and kicking/beating people to death often over nothing much at all. Out in the early hours, drunk, .... these kids are almost feral!

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

The problem is that we're all 'different'.

Attacking someone, abusing them, calling them names, or just plain discriminating against them, just because they're different, is wrong - end of story.

That's not the whole problem though, it's not just people that are 'different' that are targetted.

I got out of my car on Friday night (on my way to the chippie) to be greated by a hail of abuse from 3 lads who'd obvously been enjoying the hospitality of the local pubs. Absolutely wrecked, they proceeded to call me just about every name under the sun.

Was I dressed 'strangely'? Did I differ from the 'norm' in any way? Did I look at them, or say anything to them that might have caused offence? No. I was just me, plain old ordinary me.

There are large pockets of society which seem to think it's socially acceptable to perpetrate, and perpetuate, this sort of behaviour. Anybody standing up to them either gets beaten to within an inch of their life (or past it), or they get arrested and charged themselves. TBH these days I daren't even think about 'standing up for myself' even though I know I could, it's just not worth the aggro - I just know that if I do I'll either get a) stabbed or beaten, b) locked up, c) end up on the front page of the Sun, or d) all of the above.

One on one isn't a problem, it's the gangs. Gang behaviour tends to emulate 'pack' behaviour - all members following the leader, with the only defence to be part of a 'pack' yourself.

But what can we do about it?

---------- Post added at 11:00 ---------- Previous post was at 10:59 ----------

Funny, the word 'Feral' was what I was thinking as I wrote about 'Packs' in my last post!

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

Not really, sadly this is fairly normal and just an extension of the 'No it couldn't be my son/daughter' syndrome the Police normally run into whenever juveniles are concerned.
Still I wonder if she'll still be laughing in the 15 years or so before her son comes out of prison.

Now what would be ironic would be if the murderers have to grow their hair long and wear makeup in prison after they are 'befriended' by someone. :D

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

If we want to be tough on crime, we have to start with meaningful sentencing. Community service, whatever that is supposed to mean is a joke. ASBOs are seen as a badge of honour. Even if someone does get a custodial sentence, they get let out rediculously early.

It's no good just saying we need more police on the beat. If the punishment doesn't seem a deterrent, then anything else just pays lip service to the problem.

At the same time all the handwringing by the "these people are misunderstood brigade" is a red herring. Simple issue really. Discipline needs to start in schools and at home from a young age. Schools have their hands tied. Meanwhile the benefits culture results in too many being idle and loosing their own self respect and values for others.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

Too right. I got attacked by someone armed with an axe recently (and a proper attempt, not just a wave it about it bit effort). It went all the way to court, he got found guilty and *drum roll* got 9 months. Thats with an already bad record for crimes of violence.

He'll be out by June. :mad:

And from Coppersblog today we have this piece of Judicial lunacy.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

It is the group behaviour these days that is the most worrying, individually today's teens can be polite respectful and nice to know. Get them in a group and all that goes right out the window and you have the baying pack mentality that seems to feel they can do anything they want as a group and have no personal responsibility for their actions.

I have only confronted a group once and that was after daily abuse and insults that i finally got fed up with and went for them as they had been coming after me i was more lucky then anything else as they backed down slinked away and i havn't had any problem since. But i really don't recommend that being an approach to be employed anymore i have seen teen's with knives and also (though i am 99% certain it was a replica) a sidearm.

It is the gang culture we have got to confront and break or the problem is going to continue to get worse until very draconian measures will be bought in by some hapless government wanting to look tougher then the problem.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

One factor which may be being overlooked here is the presence of alcohol and/or drugs in many of these violent incidents involving young kids.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

I know we need to have a robust and fair system but what amazes me is that is takes so many appearances in court for a conclusion. It seems that even when the evidence is overwhelming with independant witnesses and cctv evidence there is no guarantee of a conviction.

One of the local **** here is up in court again today, the last time was for a string of crimes including driving off without paying and robbing a shop and he got community service. I have heard a 'rumour' via text this morning that he may not be in court because he was arrested last night for questioning about a serious robbery.

The justice system is a complete joke, it must be one of the most long winded and unjust processes around.

I bet he doesn't go to prison.:mad:

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

Hmm, funny you should mention this I just found it on local BBC site http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/7317745.stm

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

I don't think it's the alcohol that's the problem, or at least not in the way that the media would have us believe.

I spent quite a lot of my teenage years drunk with my mates. None of us ever beat anybody up, none of us ever stole anything, none of us ever disrespected anybody, none of us hung around the streets at night intimidating people, none of us damaged anybody else's property.

We just went out, scored some (cheap) booze, got drunk, and had a bit of fun. If it was raining we went indoors, if it was sunny we found somewhere quiet to sit and have a mess about.

We even through our cans and bottles in the bin when we were done ;)

So, if (about 12-15 years ago - God, that makes me sound old) we could enjoy ourselves without maiming, abusing, or killing anybody, why can't 'the youth of today' (now I really sound old!)?

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

I agree completely, i did the same as you and managed to stay out of prison. I think this is something that starts from day one with discipline/respect. I mean if you've got a mum who thinks its nothing serious to be up on a murder charge - there's nothing down for you :erm:

Once the foundations are laid with lack of respect and discipline it just escalates and unfortunately they reach unruly teenage years IMO. This being when social services (and we know how big their caseloads are!)/local authority services try to help, but the damage is already done. Its a thankless task for them most of the time.

I don't know what the answers are, but i do know some kids of today are beyond help and think they're above the law and I am sick of feeling intimidated by these little runts :mad: (please note thats not aimed at all kids, i think we all know which ones i mean).

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

Clearly alcohol isn't the sole cause but I think it's undeniably an important factor in these sad events as is a lack of parental control, the absence of self respect, excessive violence on TV/internet etc. etc. It is the combination of these things which I believe has resulted in the current sad state of affairs in Bliar's Britain.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

For those wondering why it is different now to when they were kids the answer is disturbinly simple. When i was a kid violence was something you only did if you had to and more foten then not it was about ending a problem not starting it.

Now violence is seen as a normal solution to any groups problem and it is seen as being cool to inflict maximum damage onto others. You will note the term group as individually you will find most teens are approachable, polite and responsive that all disaapears when they get into their groups and a more violent side appears.

This is a problem with many factors poor parenting, drink and drugs, lack of deterrent, social trends and the MEDIA yes the one's that scream for witchhunts all the time in the newspapers are the same company's that are happy to promote games like bully (has to be one of the most disgusting games i have seen) the same company's that own the music industry i have heard some of the so called modern msic and what it describes it should be banned.

I always grew up watching violent films and playing violent games but it never came with me when i left the screen now it seems too. I will never forget seeing a pack of animals kicking a boy on the ground shouting "i will gta your ass mother****er" that was an eye opener for me as i knew the chief little animal and when on his own he is the picture of politeness and good behaviour.

I cannot believe i am even saying this as i hate censorship in all forms but until we an sort this out i do now believe there has to be some censor of material and the theme of that material across the board it is no good making something adults only as a lousy parent will buy it to keep little foaming at the mouth happy.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

I think too many 'parents' have simply abdicated responsibility for their offspring so that the myriad of negative influences today's kids come into contact with are not challenged and dealt with by adults but are allowed to take root and propagate.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

There are parents that have abdicated responsibility no denying that and their children then influence the other kids who have attentive and caring parents making the whole situation for those parents harder. I have a 14 year old son and a 17 year old daughter who feel their time to be in is very limited compared to a few of their friends while other friends of theirs have even strictor in times then i and my wife impose.

Those kids who have parents that don't care know thats the case and then try to influence other kids to misbehave so they are not alone. As for social service's i am sorry i have neither time or respect for them as i know many people that have gone to them seeking help only to be told to come back when a problem escalates into something serious. By the time that happen's it is too late and early intervention surely must be better then allowing things to get out of control.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

and here's yet another example of how tough they are: :rolleyes:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7326439.stm

I heard the cousin of the victim interviewed on the radio this evening - he talked a great deal of common sense but I don't suppose the Jack Straw and his buddies will be listening.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

Excuse me and I do hate to sound like a broken record BUT not every teenager is a thug.Most of them are thoroughly decent even when out with their mates.It's a small minority who are feral,lost youth..From the way some of you are talking it's as if every teenager in the country is out of control.:(

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

It's a joke.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

I have a teenage son so would be the last to claim any such thing. We all know it's a minority but these crimes are on the increase and sentencing like this is not a deterrent - in fact it exacerbates the problem. The extent to which youths are a significant problem also varies greatly according to where you happen to live. Broadstairs and Frinton on Sea aren't exactly renowned for serious gang violence amongst youths whereas many inner city areas are.

The only reason I cited the case above was because I happened to hear the story on the car radio on my way home this evening and was greatly moved by the comments of the relative interviewed who explained how the death of his cousin had destroyed his family's lives and how he felt the sentence was an insult. I must say that I totally agree with him!

This thread is not about youths, it's about HMG once again failing to live up to it's much trumpeted promises.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

Problem is tough sentencing only works if the person commiting the crime believe's they will be caught. Many of the wrong do'ers these days simply don't believe they will get caught so why worry about the sentence you might get if your caught. If the government wants to be taken seriously then we need to get to a stage where somebody doing anything wrong knows there is a good chance of being caught and severely punished then we will see less of this sort of thing.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

No it's what you get when you let the tree huggers set the laws.

The types that send convicted thugs and car thieves on holidays, The ones who give new names to convicted killers, The same ones that set convicted killers up with a new life and security paid for by the tax payers of this country. The same ones that think the human rights act is there to get the criminals off and to stop the average person from defending themselves. The same ones that released a Thug in the morning in Warrington who had been before the judge so he could then go and Murder a innocent man in the evening who was only defending himself.

There is no justice in this country unless your one of those up before a weak Judge who lets you off for beating a man to a pulp so you can then go out and do it again .

Weak on crime hard on the victims of crime. That's what the tag line should read.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

And when they do get caught the punishment isn't enough to make them think it's not a good idea to do it again.
You have community service thats not done, fines that aren't paid and short custodial sentences that they are released from in less than half the time they should have been inside for. And even when they are inside it's not especially a tough enviroment, some regular customers of the Police even prefer being inside to life outside!
Regular meals, cheap sky tv, playstations, gyms, all the drugs they can snort/smoke/inject.

I've said it before that there aren't a lot of criminals out there but a lot of crime being committed by the same people. If judges started locking them up for longer crime would fall and some of the hangers on get the message that if you are caught you are off the street for a considerable time.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

I agree with all you say, I do know a few small time ciminals that are no longer teenagers but in their early to mid 20's and all they seem to get is community service. About 2 convictions ago he was hoping for a custodial sentence instead of yet more community sevice.

I have not seen him for a week or so, but he apparently missed his last court apearance. I know he had been in for questioining about other crimes the night beforehis appearance but I do not know the details of why he missed court.

What gets me is the people who think prison is not the answer, taking this guy as an example any form of punishment that does not involve locking him up results in crime whilst he is serving his weak punishment.

The only time this guy is not robbing and stealing is when he is locked behind bars. Am I that wrong to conclude that prison, as well as being punishment for the offender is also designed to keep offenders of the streets and stop you and I being victims.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

There is one person I'm aware of and have had dealings with. He's 18 and since his 16th birthday has racked up over 60 convictions (The true figure when you include the plea bargains, dropped cases and ones he hasn't been charged with must be well over 100)
These aren't just petty stuff there are robbery, drugs supply, possession of knifes/offensive weapons, serious assaults, housebreakings and various other charges in there.

The amount of time he's had in prison? Two 1 month sentences.

He's spent more time in Police cells awaiting court than actually in prison. He'll never change, he's been through every type of course and rehabilitation you can get. The only solution is to put him behind bars for quite some time.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

Derek, do you think that guy's life would've turned out differently had the system cracked down on his activities far more harshly and from an earlier age? My opinion is that contempt for the law an society in general is bred into these kids and by the time they're in their 20's for many of them it's just too late.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

Well without saying too much. From people I work with who have endured his antics for a while they have said from age 8 they knew he'd be either dead or in jail by 20.
He's about 18 right now, brain damaged by drug consumption from an early age, and when he was in care (from 13-16) constantly ran away because he couldn't handle the regime in care homes.

*IF* he was given intensive care and support from an early age then maybe he'd have turned out differently.
As it is any improvement made when in care was counteracted when he ran off and came home or came home on approved visits.
I work in the most deprived area of Scotland and there are plenty of decent, hard-working folk living there, there are however a couple of families (his included) who'd be better off getting re-located to St. Kilda.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

Yes I guess there will always be some who will always turn out bad but I can't help thinking that the softly softly approach doesn't do many of these young offenders much good in the longer term.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

I saw one of the local young ciminals yesterday on crutches. The story is that he fell off his motorbike, but I also heard he did it falling off wall.

I'm not sure how he could of done it on a motorbike because he has lost his driving licence.

Anyway, the good news is that whilst on crutches I doubt he is able to continue with his career in crime. I guess he will have to concentrate on his drug dealing career until he is fully mobile.

So perhaps the answer is to break their legs if they are caught stealing, at least it keeps them out of action for a while and thats certainly more effective than community service.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7338634.stm

Just been reading about Damilola Taylor's mother's death which brought back memories of what happened to him and who was responsible:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4777451.stm

So it took the murder of an entirely innocent young man to finally get these serial offending *******s off our streets! I bet they'd been laughing at Bliar's so called 'tough' approach for years!

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

What a shame Osem..She always came across as a really dignified woman.:(

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

Yes indeed - in stark contrast to those who took her son's life and all those like them who don't have respect for themselves let alone anyone else.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

Another fine example:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/w...ds/7366532.stm

:mad:

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

Maybe they were too scared.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

or maybe they were filming it on their mobiles.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

I am appalled at the very light sentence.How they were charged with manslaughter is beyond comprehension.I think they knew quite well that the young man could die but still carried on.I think it was murder.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

Surely manslaughter implies accidental or unintended death and I find it very hard to see how this could have been consisdered that. What did they think would happen to this lad? They may not have set out to deliberately kill him but, given the awful circumstances and such a protracted and deliberate assault, I think a much tougher sentence should have been handed down. If there are degrees of manslaughter then surely this sort of thing is among the worst possible.

"Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime" - if ever there was an indictment of Bliar's legacy and an example of how his cynical spin triumphed over substance then this is it!

If I were the victim's parent I'd have the words "A victim of Blair's New Labour" engraved on my poor child's headstone.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

When in prison you should be made to do soul breaking, body breaking, pointless things so that by the first week your trying to top your self with no way out then a year sentence would act like a deterrent.

If your a crack head even better because you get to cold turkey whilst doing it, not "aaww he has an addiction he needs help i know lets give him drugs:mad:"

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

Truth is its all lip service. It is a simple matter of economics. Jailing **** costs money and a lot of it. Keeping them on the streets costs less. Simple choice.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

This explains it pretty well.

Basically to ensure convictions prosecutors are accepting guilty pleas to lesser charges rather than risk people getting away with it. It also has the added bonus of keeping the murder level down and not clogging up jails for long times with people. Why keep them in for 12-15 years when they can be out in 4 or 5.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

Yep - that'd explain it :mad:

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

Hard choice, risk letting someone who's caused the death of another person get off, or have them put away for a shorter term, but still put away.
I can see in this case that a murder conviction would have been quite hard to get, as a group was involved, so while they contributed to the death, it's hard to say if the actions of each individual amounted to murder.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

Although in some cases I'm aware of there was an abundance of evidence against the accused (excellent CCTV, multiple eyewitnesses, strong DNA, the accused still wearing the bloodstained clothing a few days later...) but culpable homicide pleas have been accepted instead of murder as 'they didn't mean to kill them'

Now I'm not a doctor but when the Scottish definition of murder includes the phrase
'a willful act so reckless as to show utter disregard for the consequences' I'd say stabbing someone in the neck, jumping up and down on their head or pushing them into a flooded quarry would count as murder.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

:clap:

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

You're not a QC either, or in posession of all the facts, so to say that a conviction of murder is likely when there wasn't just one attacker is a bit rich don't you think?

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

The facts were: (in the case I'm thinking of)

Two people attacked one other, there was bad blood between them and anecdotal evidence exists to suggest they went out looking for the victim. During the attack he was beaten to the ground and then both attackers repeatedly jumped up and down on his head.

In that case I'd say both should have been found guilty of murder.
Both pled guilty to culpable homicide (equivalent to manslaughter in Scots law) and got sentences of about 9 years each, with the usual reductions for time on remand and automatic 1/2 way release. The pleas were accepted as they were arguing they didn't mean to kill the victim, the jumping on the head just got out of hand... :rolleyes:

I suppose given Scotland has a 'Not Proven' verdict it may be slightly different but in my book both should be on a life sentence right now.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

Which one dealt the killing blow?

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

They were acting together, it doesn't matter who dealt the killing blow, one could have caused an injury which would have proved fatal later on.
Or are you suggesting if 5 people shoot a person and kill him only one can be charged with murder? :confused:

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

We don't charge groups, we charge individuals. That's why muder can be difficult to get a conviction for when a group was involved.
Using your example, the killing shot would have to be proven.
For instance, 4 shoot someone in the bum, 1 shoots them in the head.
Should the 4 that aimed for the bum be convicted of murder when their shots weren't fatal?

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

So if all 5 fired off a number of shots, any of which could have been fatal and it's impossible to determine which one was the actual killing shot none of them should be charged with murder?
If thats what you think you should apply for a job with the CPS.

Thats why groups of people are charged together with the same crime. They are acting together for a common illegal purpose.

In armed robberies do you think the only person charged should be the one who takes physical possesion of the money?

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

Yes, that renowned public spirited body the Criminal Protection Service. :rolleyes:

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

Only if the charge is taking physical possesion of the money.
The accomplices are normally charged with other crimes, such as aiding, or conspiracy etc.
As I said, despite what you think, we do not try groups as a unit, we try individuals for the crimes they themselves committed, and the CPS weighs up the evidence (which lets face it, they have and you do not), and decides what way forward would get the best result (ie highest punishment with highest chance of conviction).
You may recall those gurkhas I mentioned in a previous thread, who chased a teenage boy and kicked him to death.
None of them were convicted of murder because it could not be proven which one killed the boy.
Now if they'd been charged with manslaughter, ie their actions resulted in someone's death without actually having to prove they were the killer, then they'd be in prison.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/liv...=1770&ito=1490

More ineptitude leads to death of an innocent victim.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

Unless the law in England is completely different from that in Scotland groups of people acting together for a common illegal goal are charged together. As it's sometimes put
"You fly with the crows, you get shot with the crows"

It's not what I think, it's what I know happens.

Funnily enough quite a few of the English coppers I know (who DO have intimate knowledge of the evidence) think the CPS are only interested in the highest conviction level, punishment doesn't concern them. If they can get a plea then in 99% of the cases they'll take it.

Whilst I don't know the exact legal definition of Murder in England and Wales I'd assume it's pretty similar to the Scottish one. From that and what I recall of the case they could very easily of been competently convicted of murder.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

All the cases I've dealt with involving groups of people have had them charged individually, even when in the dock together.
When the foreman of the jury is asked for the verdicts, it is not against the group, but against each member of the group.
It's what's going on with the suspected terrorist groups right now, hence how some of them have been found guilty of lesser charges.

That's because the police are not legal experts, infact from experience they know less about the law than most members of the public!
The CPS' role is to decide if there is a case to answer for, and if a conviction is likely and in the best interests of the nation, for instance, a 6 month super expensive court case to get a conviction over something trivial would be a waste of public funds. Similarly if it's likely to be nigh impossible to get a conviction for a serious crime, yet more likely to get one for a slightly lesser crime, then it makes sense to at least get a conviction than let someone get away with it, never to be charged again.

They were tried and found not guilty of murder because it was impossible to say which one actually killed the boy, and that they meant to kill him.
Manslaughter on the other hand doesn't require premeditation or intent to kill.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

Here's some interesting reading which explains some of the issues and problems with the current law.

http://www.lawcom.gov.uk/docs/cp177_web.pdf
http://www.lawcom.gov.uk/docs/lc304.pdf

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

It just highlight how slow and inefficient the system is, I have been keeping a close look on the local crown court since the beginning of this year. (when someone here provided the link)

Often I have been seeing the same name for weeks, out of interest I have searched google and found the person is in for a case where the evidence is overwhelming but it still takes at least a dozen appearances to convict.

Surely the aim should be to make the system more efficient and not to let people get away with offences because of the cost. I can see that a murder case will take a long time, but someone involved in serious animal cruelty etc should be in and dealt with quickly.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

It depends on the crime.
For instance, someone asking the police to provide evidence that they actually followed the law properly when sending a NIP to an alleged speeding motorist should result in a court appearance, however in the grand scheme of things, if that motorist has no other convictions (ie to all intents and purposes this was a one off and not much over the speed limit), it might as well be dropped, especially as in most cases the police do not follow the law when sending out NIPs...

Mistakes are made, especially with paperwork somehow getting misplaced (hmm, seen that happen before with some scrotes where I used to live) with the help of the local police if they think there's something in it for them (ie "I'll let you get away with this crime if you tell me what that bloke at number 10 is up to")

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

Charged separately but with the same crime. By your reckoning no-one should be convicted of murder if they act in a group as you can only kill someone once the last time I checked.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/l...re/7370637.stm

Both of them convicted of murder but no-one can be sure who actually hit the killing blow.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

Of course it would be a shame to hang them because as some say 'It may be found at a later date they were innocent'

I have my doubts:mad:

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

Ah, the old "kill them all, and let God sort them out" approach.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

God?

Does not exist for atheists like myself.

We have a section of society who believe hanging or any other form of death penalty is just not on, because even for those where guilt is beyond doubt ma be proved innocent at a later date.

I think it's a different matter when facts such as this case, and the other recent one where a guy was stabbed and killed in cold blood on a bus are presented.

I don't know how people can argue against the death penalty for these sort of offenders when presented with he real cold facts.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

Different case, different set of evidence. You knew that though, right?
You'd also have noticed that 3 others involved in the attack were just guilty of GBH with intent.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

I'm well aware of that.
However you have said in the past you'd need to know which one dealt the killing blow and this case + the other I mentioned shows clearly acting as a group its possible to competently convict multiple people of the same murder.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

Two people kicking someone with the clear intent to kill them is easier to convict of murder than three people kicking, stabbing and then pushing someone into a quarry, where the victim then drowns.
Which one drowned the victim? None of them. They caused the death through their actions but did not kill their victim directly, hence the manslaughter conviction rather than an attempt to charge them with murder. :rolleyes:

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

Ok which one of you two is the legal expert?:erm:

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

But why not charge them on the fact that if they were not injuring the person(s) the death may not have happened?

Our crime rules are bezerk.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

The point is "may"
If someone deliberately sets out to kill another person, such as kicking them to death, then they have committed murder.
If someone pushes another person into a pool of water after injuring them, it can be argued that they didn't intend to kill the person, only scare them or injure them further.

How's about this one.
You find out your wife is having an affair.
Insane with the situation, you get hold of a gun, and use it to force your neighbour to drive you to your wife and her lover.
You rush in and shoot both of them dead.
While you can claim diminished responsibility, your neighbour cannot, despite being held at gunpoint, and so can end up in court on charges of accessory to murder.
Barristers are currently arguing for changes to the murder laws so that this bizarre situation won't arise.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

If I was the driver my defence would be a) I didn;t know I was being driven to a murder and more importantly, b) I was held at gunpoint forced to drive to somewhere I didnt know a murder was to be committed.

I think you would have to have a very dodgy brief to actually go down as an accessory to murder in the above case.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

That's the irony, you're highly unlikely to be convicted by a jury, which is why the barristers are calling for a change, so that if your life is under threat, you have the diminished responsibility defence, as you shouldn't be expected to put the life of someone else above your own.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

Yes stop trying to change the scenario.
I gave the example (post 47 in case you are interested) of a case where two people kicking and stamping on someone were convicted of cupable homicide and not murder.

You then asked (post 48)

I was showing that you don't need to be the person who actually delivers the killing blow to be convicted of murder.

[quote-Incognitas]Ok which one of you two is the legal expert?[/quote]

Not me. Although I do have a healthy, professional interest in it. :)

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

Yes because in the case you presented there wasn't sufficient evidence to reach a conviction of murder, yet there was on the lesser charge of culpable homicide.
In the case of the deceased goth, there was sufficient evidence to secure at least two convictions of murder, while only GBH with intent for the other 3 involved.
My point as I've said is that it depends on the likelihood of getting a successful conviction, as it is better to get a conviction on a lesser charge than try for the more serious charge and have the defendant go free.
Therefore where the CPS etc are confident of a conviction for a particular charge, they will push for that charge to be answered for.


I've had several years working with employment law and more recently the VCR act 2006.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

I have used my VCR competantly for years and years prior to 2006 without reading the Act. Does that make me an expert too?

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

:rofl:

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

Having originally posted this thread as a mark of my utter disgust with Bliar's cynical rhetoric and spin, it's only fair that I acknowledge those cases in which the authorities do us all proud in the pursuit of justice:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/1921...oversight.html

:rolleyes:

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7386697.stm

:grind:

I would argue there should be ways to force lawyers to take on cases for legal aid rather than letting them cherrypick the lucrative cases.

About four hundred quid to stand up in court.

Say

"My client pleads not guilty and wishes to apply to be released on Bail, he'll be a good boy, honest. I know he's already on bail 4 times over already but he's changed, honest gov... errr My lordship"

Then in a few months time

"I know I said he's pleading Not Guilty but I can't get him off on that, I know I've wasted the time of the Police, Courts and witnesses but he'll plead guilty and take the 1/3rd off the sentence thank-you-very-much. Oh and please don't send my client to jail, he's had a hard life and stuck in a spiral of drugs and light-fingeredness but he's changed now, honest. Plus when he gets lifted again I'll trouser another couple of hundred quid from the system for defending the horrible wee scrote."

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

Could it happen anywhere else ???? :mad:

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

Yet more common sense from the authorities - I mean this sort of behaviour is unforgiveable:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/cumbria/7387240.stm

and to give more credit where it's due, they're also cracking down on dangerous thugs like this:

http://www.thisisgloucestershire.co....entPK=20562027


:rolleyes:

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

And another:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/devon/7390034.stm

Heaven forbid that a tag should clash for a heroin dealer's shorts.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

Nothing seems to suprise me these days.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

if i were the judge he would have left court wearing a ball and chain:mad:

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

and I wonder how 'tough' are they going to be on these two *******s?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/7390666.stm

Probably won't be able to send them back to South Africa after they've done their time as it almost certainly won't be safe enough for them! :mad:


and it seems like there's no justice for this family either:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/somerset/7363364.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/7390768.stm

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

Well it seems the last one was down to people not wanting to 'grass' on another.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

But witnesses did come forward and gave an account in court of what happened...

"Mr Ford said many witnesses would give different accounts of what they saw on New Year's Day 2007.

One witness, Jessica Jones, saw the defendant launch a "frenzied attack" on Mr Kelly, Mr Ford said.

He added: "She saw him (Mr Dixon) strike Mr Kelly several times to the chest and stomach areas. "She describes the affect of the attack as seeing Paul Kelly take a couple of steps forward and then fell face down and didn't move again." "

In cases like the refusal of witnesses to give evidence out of loyalty or indeed fear of reprisals is common but how many witnesses does it take ?? :confused:

---------- Post added at 09:14 ---------- Previous post was at 08:03 ----------

Will they finally get tough on this guy I wonder ?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/w...re/7391674.stm

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

I think the sentence I've highlighted says it all really.Possibly there were too many differing accounts and it was too confusing for the jury?

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

Mr Ford was the prosecutor though - hardly his job to sew seeds of doubt in the jury I'd have thought. :confused:

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/w...re/7391674.stm

Hoorah - some common sense at last!!

.....providing of course that some do gooder somewhere doesn't ensure his sentence is reduced on appeal ....

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

Surely there's some mistake, the judge missed the decimal point out?

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7393466.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7391750.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7391753.stm

I wonder how many serious criminal acts this bunch were involved in before they resroted to murder?

Ripper's rights??
 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/bradford/7400324.stm

It's all ok though because Jacquie Smith reckons:

"Top of my list of priorities, I have to say, is not Peter Sutcliffe's rights, it's the rights of those people who were his victims, and how we keep this country safe."

Yeah right! :rolleyes:

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

Rights of his victims?

Hows that going to work? Go up to a graveyard in the dead of night and ask if they feel their right to life was infringed by him?

(OK I know some of his victims didn't die)

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

Sadly some of them have been so scarred in so many ways that they have changed personalities so it could be claimed that they did die as the people they were.

I personally wonder if some barristers and solicitors are so bound up in their own little world that they don't actually really stop and think about the impact of their 'ground breaking' challenges to the law.

I also think the fact that Sutcliffe has changed his name is rather worrying..As if he was planning for a life on the outside.:(

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

An appeal are they ****ing kidding is there any sense left in this stupid country if there was anyone that should stay banged up for the rest of his natural it is this bloke. Time for some short answers to matters like this something along the lines of "we intend to lodge an appeal on behalf of peter sutcliffe, ha ha ha thats a good one now **** off".

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7402306.stm

Let's hope these two don't get released any time soon.

Interstingly the article claims that at the time, the Police Commissioner accused the media of "institutional racism" claiming that the murder of lawyer Tom ap Rhys Price's was given more press coverage.

...and there was I thinking that the enormous media coverage of the Stephen Lawrence case and the resulting public enquiry led to the Police being branded institutionally racist :confused:

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

Peter Sutcliffe should be hanged.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

If hanging wasn't illegal...

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

why? is he black? asian? not white?

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

He's quite dark;);););) anyway to appeal to the court of human rights I think you have to be human, which peter sutcliffe clearly isn't.

Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"
 

tchh, tchh - I think you will find the term is "Indigenous Briton" ;)