Pages

Prison

Three people have been sent to prison.

One, a lying, thieving MP has been sent to prison for 18 months.

He systematically stole from the taxpayer, then tried to argue that he was above the law. Did he deserve what he got?

He will probably spend his time in an open prison and be released fairly early.

His crime is theft and lying, he never physically hurt any one. He is no spring chicken and has never been in trouble before so his time in prison will not be pleasant.

So yes, I think that was the right result.

Another, a student who thinks we all owe him, has been jailed for 2 years 8 months for throwing a fire extinguisher off a building.

He was part of the student riots that did a lot of damage and his actions could have caused injury or death. He shit all over the right to protest. Did he deserve what he got?

He never actually harmed anyone either and his time will not be spent in an open prison. He came forward and admitted his crime. It looks to me like he's been made an example of.

32 months in prison? No, I think that was a bit harsh.

And then there's this woman.

She stabbed a man in the back and got ten months youth custody.

Paige Thomason who is just 1.52m (5ft) , plunged the knife into the shoulder of Adam Stagg, then told police: ‘I would say I’m sorry, but I’m not.’

Recorder Paul Derbyshire told her: ‘I accept some violence had been used to you but I cannot get away from the fact that you came outside with a large kitchen knife you embedded six or seven inches in his back, puncturing a lung and nearly killing him.’

Did she get what she deserved? 10 months youth custody on a charge of unlawful wounding after stabbing someone in the back, puncturing his lung and showing no remorse.

No. She should have been charged with attempted murder and sent to prison for a long time.

Justice works in mysterious ways.

11 Comments:

JuliaM said...

I'm not so sure on the MP, actually. If we had unlimited prison space, then yeah, bang 'I'm up. But we don't. Much more satisfying to see him picking up litter or cleaning off grafitti in an orange jumpsuit.

As for little Eddie, well, his sentence is commensurate with the harm he potentially caused. So comparing his and Paige's sentence does indeed show how broken the justice system is.

And how biased in favour of women.

Bucko said...

Julia - I would tend to agree about the MP if he wasn't an MP.
If he was just an average joe who had embezzled the money off his employer then paid it back, community service would be fine.
Because he is an MP who has seriously abused his power, I think prison is the best option.
MPs are more than happy to keep creating "crimes" that get more and more people sent down, they should act completely within the law themselves.
I would not use the excuse that prisons are full because it's people like him that have filled them.

Anonymous said...

Sharing a cell with the 6'4'' convicted gay rapist body builder as well I hope.

Woodsy42 said...

"Justice works in mysterious ways. "

Or sometimes not, as the case may be.

Angry Exile said...

David Chaytor's crime was not victimless. It may have done no physical harm but you can say the same about anyone who steals through dishonesty, fraud and embezzlement. Nor should the fact that his stealing was a fairly small sum taken collectively from many millions of taxpayers cut any ice. He stole, he does some fucking time - shouldn't be a terribly complex judgment to write out. I'd say 18 months might be a little light given that there's the abuse of position involved, but that's just me.

As for the other two, I agree with you about Thomason but Woollard's action, had he stopped to think about it for a nanosecond, clearly endangered other people's lives. That he didn't stop to think about it would probably not have avoided the charge being manslaughter had it caught some plod or another protestor in the head. IANAL but I think it's an act that which any reasonable person could see might lead to someone's death, and which in fact does get someone killed, qualifies as manslaughter. Fire extinguisher dropped of a building? Sounds like it to me. He may not have intended to put people in that danger but that's what he did. 32 months - probably 18 months or less in reality - seems about right to me. But if you're right that he won't be in an open prison for any of it that does seem OTT. I doubt he's a risk to the public.

Bucko said...

Woodsy - quite true, quite true.

AE - I wasn't saying Chaytors actions were victimless, only that he never pysically harmed anyone. He doesn't look like prison material so I doubt his time will be easy.
As for Woolard, I never agree with punishing people for what they "might" have done, only for what they did or intended. As with the third example, Thomason, she clearly intended murder.
Woolard is a reckless knob cheese but I do think he's had the book thrown at him because of the high profile nature of the case.

Dioclese said...

Good to see that the sentencing guidelines are so flexible!

Bucko said...

Flexible? Downright bent if you ask me.

JuliaM said...

"IANAL but I think it's an act that which any reasonable person could see might lead to someone's death, and which in fact does get someone killed, qualifies as manslaughter. Fire extinguisher dropped of a building? Sounds like it to me."

If he'd pleaded 'comprehensive school curriculum in physics', he might have got away with it....

Angry Exile said...

As for Woolard, I never agree with punishing people for what they "might" have done, only for what they did or intended.

So do I, so let's examine this in more detail. Presumably he intended the fire extinguisher he threw from the roof to land on the ground among people (Julia's comment about GCSE physics notwithstanding) or he wouldn't have thrown it. An educated young man (Julia's comment about... you get the picture) presumably he had a good idea what would if it hit someone, as borne out by his claim that he was aiming for an empty patch of ground. Now, either it's because he's got as much talent for controlling flying objects as an Australian bowler or because dropped fire extinguishers aren't easy to aim well from several stories up, which again should have been clear to Woollard if he'd thought for a moment, it ended up missing some plod by only a yard. Even that might have been only because someone saw it and yelled for the rest to get out of the way.

Okay, so we're agreed not to go after him for what he might have done, and that's fine because he while he only might have committed manslaughter he wasn't charged with it, though as I said if someone had been killed he probably would have been. But as you said it's not about what he might have done but what he did do, and what he did do was put other people's lives in danger for no particular reason than it didn't occur to him not to, despite the danger being sufficiently clear to him that he tried to aim the extinguisher for a clear patch of ground. I quite like the Yanks' offence of 'reckless endangerment' for this kind of thing since it's descriptive of what was done but I don't think it exists in the UK, and almost certainly not in England since Woollard was charged with violent disorder. But let's imagine we're playing fantasy statute books or something and that his offence could be called reckless endangerment to life or something like that - I'd say 32 months with half actually served seems about right, though they really could stick him in a low risk prison almost from day one.

Oh, and to me it seems like he's trying to be Mick Hucknall, and I'd give the fucker a life sentence just for that. :-)

Bucko said...

AE - Agreed, and "Oh, and to me it seems like he's trying to be Mick Hucknall, and I'd give the fucker a life sentence just for that. :-) "

LOL!

They may put him in a low risk prison, I doubt he'll go to high security. He won't go to an open prison like Chaytor though.