Buce Posted 19 December 2016 Share Posted 19 December 2016 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-38367103 I'm just wondering what people think of this. The man convicted is 101 yrs old, so 13 yrs inside is effectively a 'whole life' term. Should that have influenced his sentencing? Or is the sentence just? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MPH Posted 19 December 2016 Share Posted 19 December 2016 Totally justified. To not of given him a custodial sentence would send out a painful message to the victims and to others - you can get away with crime if you are old. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finnegan Posted 19 December 2016 Share Posted 19 December 2016 Sorry Buce but that's just stupid logic. He's old so he should do less? Sentencing should never really consider age. He did what he did, end of. I don't give a toss if he's 18 or 180. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tuna Posted 19 December 2016 Share Posted 19 December 2016 A reminder that the long arm of the law catches up to you eventually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buce Posted 19 December 2016 Author Share Posted 19 December 2016 29 minutes ago, Finnegan said: Sorry Buce but that's just stupid logic. He's old so he should do less? Sentencing should never really consider age. He did what he did, end of. I don't give a toss if he's 18 or 180. The logic isn't mine.The judge alluded to it in his sentencing, though ultimately decided not to take it into consideration. I inferred from that that there is probably a school of thought that suggests that age, plus the historic nature of the crime, should attract a lesser penalty or no prosecution at all. I just thought that I'd throw it out there for discussion. Personally, I'm happy for him to rot. However, I'm wondering if that's because of the nature of the crime. Would I feel differently if his crime was, say, embezzlement? Burglary? Fraud? And should one's crime always catch up with you? Plenty of places have a Statute of Limitations. Just as an experiment, replace his crime with something else, and see if you still think the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webbo Posted 19 December 2016 Share Posted 19 December 2016 Prison is cheaper for his family than a care home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Countryfox Posted 19 December 2016 Share Posted 19 December 2016 Got off light ... I'd have chopped his balls off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigFoxForYou Posted 19 December 2016 Share Posted 19 December 2016 Hes basically already gotten away with it. Now he gets state funded lodgings, food and healthcare in prison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alf Bentley Posted 19 December 2016 Share Posted 19 December 2016 Enormously important to his victims that he WAS jailed. If he had admitted his crimes 30+ years ago, he could have helped his victims in their recovery, sparing them at least some of their torment. He'd have probably also served a shorter sentence and been able to grow old and die outside prison. If someone had murdered somebody I cared about 35 years ago, I'd want them to face justice whenever they were caught - and not get treated leniently because they had grown old evading justice. His age should be taken into account while he's in prison (re. expectations of him, medical care etc.) but absolutely right that he's been given a tough sentence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DB11 Posted 19 December 2016 Share Posted 19 December 2016 I think this part is quite shocking as well - you have no remorse whatsoever. So maybe he genuinely believes what he did was alright Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Countryfox Posted 19 December 2016 Share Posted 19 December 2016 5 minutes ago, DB11 said: I think this part is quite shocking as well - you have no remorse whatsoever. So maybe he genuinely believes what he did was alright Or more likely and even worse ... He knew what he did was totally and utterly wrong and doesn't give a sh1t. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marmite Posted 19 December 2016 Share Posted 19 December 2016 I would of just put him in a room with his victims and let them decide his fate. If he died in there room so be it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 20 December 2016 Share Posted 20 December 2016 I'm delighted he lived long enough to die in prison, it's exactly what he deserves for his crimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
surrifox Posted 20 December 2016 Share Posted 20 December 2016 Lack of remorse weighs against him in this . I'm afraid this doesn't sit well with me however - war criminals and concentration camp guards have received less harsh treatment despite their culpability in the deaths of thousands of men women and children Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Countryfox Posted 20 December 2016 Share Posted 20 December 2016 1 hour ago, surrifox said: I'm afraid this doesn't sit well with me however Just hope it never happens to your kids mate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.