British Justice is too liberal

[STEED]

Toddler fight women sentenced

Four women who forced two toddlers to fight and filmed them punching each other have each been given 12-month suspended sentences.
Zara Care, 29, Carole Olver, 48, Serenza Olver, 29, and Danielle Olver, 19, all members of the same family from Plymouth, Devon, had pleaded guilty to child cruelty at an earlier hearing.
The court heard how they goaded the youngsters to hit each other in the face, and when one did not fight they called him a "wimp" and a "faggot".

http://www.itv.com/news/index_b3f7215bf510fb5a2592ee8fe4f746e8.html (http://www.itv.com/news/index_b3f7215bf510fb5a2592ee8fe4f746e8.html)


Once again the system hands out a liberal sentence, I am disgusted.

[Letum]

I really don't think we can begin to say what we think the sentence should be with out having heard the court case in full.

To pass judgement ourselves it to judge the book completely by the [media] cover. I may not have complete trust in the courts, but I have far less trust in the mainstream media and the knee-jerk reactions it produces in some people.

The tabloid press loves nothing more than to stir up the "England's going to-hell-in-a-handcart" league.

[waste gate]

If the British system is anything like the US system, and I think it is. Plea bargain is the culprit. People plead guilty to a crime they did not commit to save themselves, and the court system the time, expense, and publicity, of a trial to a crime they may have commited.

[Letum]

If the British system is anything like the US system, and I think it is. Plea bargain is the culprit. People plead guilty to a crime they did not commit to save themselves, and the court system the time, expense, and publicity, of a trial to a crime they may have commited.

How much of the linked article did you read?

[TteFAboB]

There you go. School shooting to take place in Britain 20 years from now.

Now any sentence that doesn't condemn these women to fight each other with hairsprays, magazines and whatever else untill the judges find that they've had enough, and this enough is at least as long as the toddlers fought plus time proportional to the adults increased size, age and strength, is a too light sentence. :smug:

Now there isn't anything wrong in "toughening them up" indeed but what they did is not even close to how that's done, beginning by ridiculously improper age. Lame pretext to hide their sadism.

[waste gate]

If the British system is anything like the US system, and I think it is. Plea bargain is the culprit. People plead guilty to a crime they did not commit to save themselves, and the court system the time, expense, and publicity, of a trial to a crime they may have commited.

How much of the linked article did you read?

I read the entire arcticle and never once was a trial mentioned.

'Care pleaded guilty to causing or procuring the children to be ill-treated in a manner likely to cause unnecessary suffering or injury and was sentenced to 12 months for each child, to run concurrently and suspended for two years'.

Sounds like a plea. What were the original charges? Court documents are acceptable if you'd like to show that a plea bargain was not used.

[STEED]

I really don't think we can begin to say what we think the sentence should be with out having heard the court case in full.

I am not saying life or 20 years but that sentence was liberal. If that's the best our justice system can hand out no wonder criminals are laughing.

[Letum]

If the British system is anything like the US system, and I think it is. Plea bargain is the culprit. People plead guilty to a crime they did not commit to save themselves, and the court system the time, expense, and publicity, of a trial to a crime they may have commited.
How much of the linked article did you read?
I read the entire arcticle and never once was a trial mentioned.

'Care pleaded guilty to causing or procuring the children to be ill-treated in a manner likely to cause unnecessary suffering or injury and was sentenced to 12 months for each child, to run concurrently and suspended for two years'.

Sounds like a plea. What were the original charges? Court documents are acceptable if you'd like to show that a plea bargain was not used.
There isn't a direct reflection of a "plea bargain" for cases like this in the UK.
All cases of this severity continue through the full court process, although a early guilty plea will ensure a faster court case and usually a reduced sentence.
The court case took place at Plymouth Magistrates Court.



*edit* 2nd post merged:


I really don't think we can begin to say what we think the sentence should be with out having heard the court case in full.
I am not saying life or 20 years but that sentence was liberal. If that's the best our justice system can hand out no wonder criminals are laughing.
I don't understand how you can claim to know this without knowing all the details of the case. For example the article hinted that both women where bought up with similar abuse by their own parents. I suspect other factors like this where taken into account.

It's going to be a hell of a long time until the women can see their kids again without supervision and if they commit any crimes for 12 years they will serve a very long sentence.

I can't comment on weather this is severe enough, but it certainly isn't a walk in the park.

[STEED]

Suspended sentence is a joke.

[Tchocky]

Suspended sentence is a joke.

They're a good balance between an incentive not to reoffend, and horrifically overcrowded prisons.
Of course there are margins, where the system doesnt work. just like accepting a raise bumps you into a higher tax band, and reduces your income :)

in this case, the mothers arent going to do it again, and it's preferable to placing the children in the care of the state. (subjective personal biased liberal opinion :p)

[waste gate]

How many times does one have to see the word plea in an arcticle to say, 'OK, this was a plea bargain'. Someone needs to sit in a court room for a while. I suggest you follow two or three people through the entire process. While you are at it ask defense attorneys (barristers I think you calll them) how the system works.

[down and out]

The fight, filmed on a home video recorder, was found by the children's father who is in the Army and had returned from a tour of duty in Iraq.
He had been looking for some footage of his children playing to show their grandparents, but instead found the fight and reported it to social services.


http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,70131-1261618,00.html


The court heard that, when interviewed by police, Carole Olver said: "I didn't see any harm in toughening them up - I done the same with my own children."


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/devon/6574907.stm

:nope:

[down and out]

How many times does one have to see the word plea in an arcticle to say, 'OK, this was a plea bargain'. Someone needs to sit in a court room for a while. I suggest you follow two or three people through the entire process. While you are at it ask defense attorneys (barristers I think you calll them) how the system works.

Have been through the system myself

Its not plea bargaining

Pleading guilty just speeds the trial along and cuts down expense

Doesnt mean the sentance is any less :nope:

Trust me

[STEED]

There is no excuse what so ever to abuse children what ever form it takes.

[Letum]

There is no excuse what so ever to abuse children what ever form it takes.

Dear me no! I don't think anyone here is suggesting that! :huh:

[waste gate]

How many times does one have to see the word plea in an arcticle to say, 'OK, this was a plea bargain'. Someone needs to sit in a court room for a while. I suggest you follow two or three people through the entire process. While you are at it ask defense attorneys (barristers I think you calll them) how the system works.

Have been through the system myself

Its not plea bargaining

Pleading guilty just speeds the trial along and cuts down expense

Doesnt mean the sentance is any less :nope:

Trust me

Share with us what the original charges lodged against you as compared to what the court heard, and what you were sentenced for. Different I'll wager. I also suspect no trial.

That is called plea bargain.

[Letum]

How many times does one have to see the word plea in an arcticle to say, 'OK, this was a plea bargain'. Someone needs to sit in a court room for a while. I suggest you follow two or three people through the entire process. While you are at it ask defense attorneys (barristers I think you calll them) how the system works.
Have been through the system myself

Its not plea bargaining

Pleading guilty just speeds the trial along and cuts down expense

Doesnt mean the sentance is any less :nope:

Trust me
Share with us what the original charges lodged against you as compared to what the court heard, and what you were sentenced for. Different I'll wager. I also suspect no trial.

That is called plea bargain.

Seriously gate, we don't have a equivalent of the "plea bargain" in the UK for crimes like this.
It's really that simple!

Why do you want to think we do?! Why do you think we do in the first place?!

I really should give up trying to explain things to you.

[down and out]

The original charges were theft from the workplace
Charges in court were theft from the workplace
Sentance was custodial

AFTER a guilty plea at a court hearing

All you get when you meet your lawyer is " a guilty plea will look better on you than a not guilty one "

There is no room in everyday British justice for bargaining

The prosocution dont care what you plea
They have no need to rush you through

A not guilty plea would have delayed the trial by some months and the sentance would have been the same in the end
Maybe a little heavier for the fact you pleaded not guilty

But you certainly cant offer to plead guilty for a lesser\reduced sentance

[waste gate]

How many times does one have to see the word plea in an arcticle to say, 'OK, this was a plea bargain'. Someone needs to sit in a court room for a while. I suggest you follow two or three people through the entire process. While you are at it ask defense attorneys (barristers I think you calll them) how the system works.
Have been through the system myself

Its not plea bargaining

Pleading guilty just speeds the trial along and cuts down expense

Doesnt mean the sentance is any less :nope:

Trust me
Share with us what the original charges lodged against you as compared to what the court heard, and what you were sentenced for. Different I'll wager. I also suspect no trial.

That is called plea bargain.

Seriously gate, we don't have a equivalent of the "plea bargain" in the UK for crimes like this.
It's really that simple!

Why do you want to think we do?! Why do you think we do in the first place?!

I really should give up trying to explain things to you.

That was my implied question in my first post to this thread.


If the British system is anything like the US system, and I think it is.


If I was wrong, which is very possible, I've been wrong before, why wasn't it poined out to me earlier? You and I both would have saved much time.
I see the word plea and it suggests:

People plead guilty to a crime they did not commit to save themselves, and the court system the time, expense, and publicity, of a trial to a crime they may have commited.

[Tchocky]

@ waste gate

8th post


There isn't a direct reflection of a "plea bargain" for cases like this in the UK.
All cases of this severity continue through the full court process, although a early guilty plea will ensure a faster court case and usually a reduced sentence.
The court case took place at Plymouth Magistrates Court.

[waste gate]

The original charges were theft from the workplace
Charges in court were theft from the workplace
Sentance was custodial

AFTER a guilty plea at a court hearing

All you get when you meet your lawyer is " a guilty plea will look better on you than a not guilty one "

There is no room in everyday British justice for bargaining

The prosocution dont care what you plea
They have no need to rush you through

A not guilty plea would have delayed the trial by some months and the sentance would have been the same in the end
Maybe a little heavier for the fact you pleaded not guilty

But you certainly cant offer to plead guilty for a lesser\reduced sentance

Sounds like you should have gone to trial and let the state prove (beyond a reasonable doubt, is that the UK level or just the US?) that you were guilty of the charge.

Usually, in this country, it is the prosecution which offers the reduced charge.

[down and out]

Thats the difference
They wont offer a reduced charge\sentance

Without going into details it wouldnt have mattered going to a not guilty trial

:rotfl:

The way it works here is you are charged and given a court date
You meet with your own lawyer beforehand
You attend court and plead guilty\not guilty

Court is adjourned pending reports either way

Inbetween you meet your lawyer and probation officers to discuss your circumstances etc
Probation officers also put in recommendations for sentance - up to the court if they listen to that recommendation

Next court appearance is for sentance if you pleaded guilty first time OR full trial if you pleaded not guilty

[waste gate]

Thats the difference
They wont offer a reduced charge\sentance

Without going into details it wouldnt have mattered going to a not guilty trial

:rotfl:

The way it works here is you are charged and given a court date
You meet with your own lawyer beforehand
You attend court and plead guilty\not guilty

Court is adjourned pending reports either way

Inbetween you meet your lawyer and probation officers to discuss your circumstances etc
Probation officers also put in recommendations for sentance - up to the court if they listen to that recommendation

Next court appearance is for sentance if you pleaded guilty first time OR full trial if you pleaded not guilty

So, 'reasonable doubt' isn't part of British law? If that is the case, I feel for you folks. Sounds like if he was arrested he must have done the crime or else he never would have been arrested.:nope:

Correct me if I am wrong.

[down and out]

You are wrong

:rotfl:

Being caught red handed with a van full of stuff doesnt leave any reasonable doubt :doh:

The same as being caught on video tape urging 2 toddlers to fight doesnt

[Letum]

Thats the difference
They wont offer a reduced charge\sentance

Without going into details it wouldnt have mattered going to a not guilty trial

:rotfl:

The way it works here is you are charged and given a court date
You meet with your own lawyer beforehand
You attend court and plead guilty\not guilty

Court is adjourned pending reports either way

Inbetween you meet your lawyer and probation officers to discuss your circumstances etc
Probation officers also put in recommendations for sentance - up to the court if they listen to that recommendation

Next court appearance is for sentance if you pleaded guilty first time OR full trial if you pleaded not guilty
So, 'reasonable doubt' isn't part of British law? If that is the case, I feel for you folks. Sounds like if he was arrested he must have done the crime or else he never would have been arrested.:nope:

Correct me if I am wrong.

You really are hard work today gate!

What in down and out's post makes you think "reasonable doubt" isn't part of British law?

Seriously....I've read down and out's post 3 or 4 times now and I can't see how you got from his post to the "beyond reasonable doubt" system.

[Skybird]

Suspended sentence is a joke.
From the perspective of behaviorism, it is indeed. From any other perspective I could imagine, it is as well. Suspended sentences should be forbidden. If a judge think it is justified that somebody deserves just a warning shot (for whatever reasons), he should make the penalty less severe. For example every juvenile stealing in a warehouse for the first time would go to jail with me being the judge, without exception. The point is that I probably wouldn't send him there for months, when it is the first time. Mybe - depending on the case and my impression of it - only for one week or so. Enough to get the message thoroughly felt by the offender and give him a chance to perceive that being in prison is not a comfortable thing. A penalty that is not felt is useless, from a psychological perspective.

[Letum]

Suspended sentence is a joke. From the perspective of behaviorism, it is indeed. From any other perspective I could imagine, it is as well. Suspended sentences should be forbidden. If a judge think it is justified that somebody deserves just a warning shot (for whatever reasons), he should make the penalty less severe. For example every juvenile stealing in a warehouse for the first time would go to jail with me being the judge, without exception. The point is that I probably wouldn't send him there for months, when it is the first time. Mybe - depending on the case and my impression of it - only for one week or so. Enough to get the message thoroughly felt by the offender and give him a chance to perceive that being in prison is not a comfortable thing. A penalty that is not felt is useless, from a psychological perspective.

That's not gonna be cheep. Short sentences cost a lot, not only in prison space, security and admin, but also because if often means the guilty party loses his/her tax-paying job.
Suspended sentences do reduce crime and they are cheep. They do help from the perspective of behaviorism because the guilty party often serves the full sentence and more in prison if they commit another crime in the sentence period.
I don't want to waste anymore tax money then is absolutely necessary when dealing with those that find themselves on the wrong side of the law.

[P_Funk]

I think that Skybird gets the point somewhat. but I am hesitant to throw kids in jail without question.

There needs to be a purpose in sentencing. It isn't just good enough to say "Lock 'em as long as we can". The point of a criminal justice system is rehabilitate people when you can. The problems with lengthy prison sentences is that they desocialize inmates, attach strong stigma to them, and ultimately don't deal with the underlying issue of why a crime was committed.

If encarceration alone were good enough then the US, the most encarcerated nation in the world, would have the loweset repeat offender rate.

[waste gate]

Ya see, I was trying to be accepting of other's place and I was slammed for it.
I even admitted my lack of perfection and that I have made mistakes in the past.

down and out told me I was wrong in my assesment of British law. The attacks were only superfulous and didn't contribute to any positive discourse.

[Letum]

Ya see, I was trying to be accepting of other's place and I was slammed for it.
I even admitted my lack of perfection and that I have made mistakes in the past.

down and out told me I was wrong in my assessment of British law. The attacks were only superfluous and didn't contribute to any positive discourse.
Terribly sorry if I caused any offense gate, I was just trying to understand your line of thought.

[waste gate]

Ya see, I was trying to be accepting of other's place and I was slammed for it.
I even admitted my lack of perfection and that I have made mistakes in the past.

down and out told me I was wrong in my assessment of British law. The attacks were only superfluous and didn't contribute to any positive discourse.
Terribly sorry if I caused any offense gate, I was just trying to understand your line of thought.

I wasn't offended Letum. I've always worked under the precept that only I can allow others to offend me. I was trying to put myself in the shoes of others and since I'm not allowed there I will stay out. No offense.

[Letum]

Ya see, I was trying to be accepting of other's place and I was slammed for it.
I even admitted my lack of perfection and that I have made mistakes in the past.

down and out told me I was wrong in my assessment of British law. The attacks were only superfluous and didn't contribute to any positive discourse. Terribly sorry if I caused any offense gate, I was just trying to understand your line of thought.
I wasn't offended Letum. I've always worked under the precept that only I can allow others to offend me. I was trying to put myself in the shoes of others and since I'm not allowed there I will stay out. No offense.

Glad to hear theres no hard feelings! :()1:

[Skybird]

They do help from the perspective of behaviorism because the guilty party often serves the full sentence and more in prison if they commit another crime in the sentence period.
You quote Behaviorism wrong here, that is not true. The imagination of a future penalty for a future offence that has not been committed yet psychologically works not the same way like a real penalty for a past offence. Also important is that between act and consequence as little time as possible is passing. weeks or months later, and the n even running thorugh several levels of court hierarchies does not help. All this espeically true for youngsters who due to puberty systemitcally test the limits they can get away with, and try to see how far they can go without being called to responsibility.

Eventually the imagination of a future penalty for a future deed can have an effect only when the real penalty for a past offence at least once or twice has been experienced. If it has, then this is what is called the learning experience (which in behavioral theory is nothing else but manipulation of behavioral patterns by rewards and pentlies). Behaviorism has parallels to an engineer's approach.

If you know a warehouse detective, ask him about his experiences with juvenile thiefs. His tales will kill many well-meant illusions about pedagogy very quickly.

If you wish to help youngster not going wrong again, give them a feelable penalty that really is sufficently aversive a stimulus, but do not make it tough as to wanting to brake their character. If you suspend the sentence, they learn a different message (as long as the police and the parents do not impress them sufficiently). They will learnt that they can get away with it. Vey bad lesson.

Concerning loosing a job while being sentenced, what is your argument? Letting somebody get away with phanatsized "pernalties" so that he does not feel negative conseqeunces from his criminal deed? Well, he better thinks about loosing his job before he commits his crime. If my dog does something that is forbidden (peeing in the house), I do not give him a cookie for sure.

Maybe that costs money. Okay, bring it up, or accept a failing system. Quality has it's price. the current legal systems, especially in the field of youngsters, is a total failure, at least here in Germany. The system does not hold a deterring effect.

[Skybird]

I think that Skybird gets the point somewhat. but I am hesitant to throw kids in jail without question.

There needs to be a purpose in sentencing. It isn't just good enough to say "Lock 'em as long as we can".

I have not said that, I said exactly the opposite, somewhat!!! I said a penalty is not meant to brake a fist-time juvenile offender, let's say a thief, and that he should not go to jail for months and years, but maybe for just a half a week or a week, so that he gets a taste of it. for many 13 or 14 or 15 or 16 year old, that could be an experience that makes an impact, but does not damage their psychological future developement.

Also read my last reply above ,(which came after your posting, so no hard feelings).

If there is no aversive conseqeunce after a thief is caught, he will learn: "I can steal and get away with it". Again, a bad lesson that is. the negative quality of the consuequence must be felt, unconditonally, and as fast as possible.

Sorry guys, but I had to deal with this kind of theories for years, I am no fan of behaviorism, by far not, but i must admit that on some issues the data it collected is simply overwhelming so that even different schools of psychology have stopped to oppose it in these areas - except pedagogy. If in a legal system schoolchildren start competitons of how often they can manage to get picked up by the police during one sem,estre, that system's deterrent efect is nil. Zero. Rien. Nada. Non-existant. We have had extreme cases were the pedagogical system gave over 40 suspended penalties to juveniles before they reached the age of 18. Here it is neither about doing justice, or helping a struggling young man/girl, but it is ideological tren ch warfare by which pedagogy tries to enforce itself being seen as the proven, winning system. The statistic is totally unambigious on the future fates of such person. Most of them end up in making a criminal career of constantly growing seriousness.

[P_Funk]

I have not said that, I said exactly the opposite, somewhat!!! I know. I didn't mean to imply that. Its a new paragraph meant to go on with agreeing with you. The bit about throwing kids in jail witout question was meant as just an aside to my own views, but otherwise I'm in full agreement with you to the extent that you can see in the rest of my post.

[Skybird]

I have not said that, I said exactly the opposite, somewhat!!! I know. I didn't mean to imply that. Its a new paragraph meant to go on with agreeing with you. The bit about throwing kids in jail witout question was meant as just an aside to my own views, but otherwise I'm in full agreement with you to the extent that you can see in the rest of my post.
Ah, okay, I see now that I understood the context in a wrong way. I apologize if you felt slammed. I got it differently when reading it the first times.

[P_Funk]

I have not said that, I said exactly the opposite, somewhat!!! I know. I didn't mean to imply that. Its a new paragraph meant to go on with agreeing with you. The bit about throwing kids in jail witout question was meant as just an aside to my own views, but otherwise I'm in full agreement with you to the extent that you can see in the rest of my post. Ah, okay, I see now that I understood the context in a wrong way. I apologize if you felt slammed. I got it differently when reading it the first times. Accepted. And actually after I read your response I noticed that my wording could easily be misinterpreted.

But all is well in never never land again.:up:

But I love your response.

I have not said that, I said exactly the opposite,... somewhat!!!

I find the "somewhat" funny.:p

[Skybird]

I have not said that, I said exactly the opposite, somewhat!!! I know. I didn't mean to imply that. Its a new paragraph meant to go on with agreeing with you. The bit about throwing kids in jail witout question was meant as just an aside to my own views, but otherwise I'm in full agreement with you to the extent that you can see in the rest of my post. Ah, okay, I see now that I understood the context in a wrong way. I apologize if you felt slammed. I got it differently when reading it the first times. Accepted. And actually after I read your response I noticed that my wording could easily be misinterpreted.

But all is well in never never land again.:up:

But I love your response.

I have not said that, I said exactly the opposite,... somewhat!!!

I find the "somewhat" funny.:p

I didn't said the opposite word by word , but expressed what I meant with "the opposite" more implicitly, indirectly, I think. But maybe it is just my limited competence to master this English language.

[P_Funk]

I didn't said the opposite word by word , but expressed what I meant with "the opposite" more implicitly, indirectly, I think. But maybe it is just my limited competence to master this English language.
No you're pretty good with English, unlike most native english speakers.:roll:

The more languages you have the better they say.