Sentencing (criminal justice system)

[diy_fun_uk]

I have not been following the case, but surely they didn't set out with the intention of killing the 39?

Perhaps not, hence manslaughter. However to these people, humans are simply a commodity through which to make money with scant regard for their welfare. The driver received a text from his boss in the operation, saying along the lines of 'give them air but don't let them out.' The trailer was a completely sealed unit, no vents. By the time the rear door was opened it was too late, they had all perished. Scratch marks were found on the inside of the trailer where they had been trying to claw their way out through sheer desperation.

In this case I believe all those closely involved should be locked up for life unless there is concrete evidence they weren't aware of what they were transporting.

 

[Notch7]

CRIME is the single largest, and longest-standing, problem in Britain. Crime, not coronavirus, is the pandemic that we should be tackling, and the only certain way to prevent crime is by the effective and consistent use of punishment. Crime currently rules our lives, from the drugs turning young people into zombies to the antisocial behaviour that has turned many of our towns and cities into no-go areas after dark (and in some places during daylight). We should not live in fear of crime as we currently do. It should be those with criminal intentions who should live in fear. Criminals need to be taught who is boss.

Sadly you don't like lefty policies that help reduce crime.

So stop moaning when right wing policies create inequality and high crime

You reap what you sow

 

[Notch7]

Yet a few on here were prepared to give them the benefit of doubt. https://www.diynot.com/diy/threads/immigrant-truck-deaths-could-driver-be-innocent.531916/

Strangely enough, mostly remainers advocating for the driver. It will be interesting to get their views on the sentences when they are announced, especially Ellals.

Ellal and others said innocent until proven guilty.

That is not the same as benefit of doubt.

Please try harder with your comprehension, I know nuance and detail are something you flag waving brexers struggle with

 

[johnny2007]

To me, the one place you should feel safe is your home. If someone elects to break in to that personal space (especially when people are in) it should be treated as a serious crime with much harsher sentences passed.

Or better, pass a law that anybody breaking into someone's home, automatically loses all human rights and the homeowners will not be prosecuted whatever happens.
The burglaries would stop immediately.

 

[Deleted member 18243]

And we also need to seriously look at those still roaming free with multiple previous convictions e.g. for so called lower level crime such as breaking and entering. To me, the one place you should feel safe is your home. If someone elects to break in to that personal space (especially when people are in) it should be treated as a serious crime with much harsher sentences passed. You read of some people wearing their previous convictions like a badge of honour 'yeah I've got 18 previous convictions for a, b, c, d ...'

In a justice system with effective punishment nobody should have that many convictions, let alone be "at large" with that many convictions. "Three strikes and you're out" is a good idea, i.e. if you haven't been jailed for your first or second conviction, you will definitely be for your third conviction, even if it is less serious than the first two. The person should be punished based on the record of his behaviour, rather than for the individual crime.

 

[diy_fun_uk]

Or better, pass a law that anybody breaking into someone's home, automatically loses all human rights and the homeowners will not be prosecuted whatever happens.
The burglaries would stop immediately.

Although I partly see where you're coming from, I still think there has to be due process as things like coercion/threats can be involved i.e. forcing someone to commit a crime. However I do agree with the underlying principal of creating much harsher sentences. Can you imagine either you or a loved one waking up early hours to discover a complete stranger in your room who, if you're lucky, proceeds to flee.

Then they get handed ridiculously short sentences. Just because a type of crime might be common and carried out in high numbers doesn't equate to low level in my opinion.

 

[johnny2007]

Although I partly see where you're coming from, I still think there has to be due process as things like coercion/threats can be involved i.e. forcing someone to commit a crime. However I do agree with the underlying principal of creating much harsher sentences. Can you imagine either you or a loved one waking up early hours to discover a complete stranger in your room who, if you're lucky, proceeds to flee.

Then they get handed ridiculously short sentences. Just because a type of crime might be common and carried out in high numbers doesn't equate to low level in my opinion.

Exactly.
Wouldn't it be better if I dealt with the criminal myself behind closed doors?
I would help the world become a better place.
Once in my possession, the criminal won't commit any more crimes, ever, guaranteed.

 

[Deleted member 18243]

Minor crime has gone through the roof, except minor is not so minor now.

Harry, what happens now, when a particular crime "goes through the roof", is that the police stop enforcing the law against it, on the grounds that they "haven't got the manpower", or that it is "taking resources away from more serious incidents".

Because of this we have many crimes that are now, de facto, legal. Hence, the police will not respond to reports of shoplifting; cars whizz down your residential street at 60mph just inches from your elbow; vagrants lie in their filth in shop doorways; the rotten stench of cannabis fills the air at every turn; cars park full-width on the pavement and on double yellows, and there is graffiti everywhere.

Sadly, a lot of people don't notice this decline happening and just get used to it.

The morally inclined person will naturally speculate on what crimes will be, de facto, legalised next. I reckon it will be burglary, criminal damage to / arson of / theft from business premises; night-time public order offences i.e. fights in pubs, taxis etc.

What will be left eventually for the British police to do for the money we pay them?

 

[Notch7]

In a justice system with effective punishment nobody should have that many convictions, let alone be "at large" with that many convictions. "Three strikes and you're out" is a good idea, i.e. if you haven't been jailed for your first or second conviction, you will definitely be for your third conviction, even if it is less serious than the first two. The person should be punished based on the record of his behaviour, rather than for the individual crime.

Andy please can you tell me why you spout this absolute bolox.

America has the largest number of people in jail and its crime rate is high.

So why do you say stuff which is utterly stupid


Please can you attempt to explain why you never give up repeating your utter idiocy, I'd just like to know why you are incapable of learning

 

[Mottie]

Ellal and others said innocent until proven guilty.

Ellal and all the others including you were more interested in turning the thread into an anti Tory/anti Brexit thread yet again. Looking back on some of the comments ‘Ellal and the other's' made you can see all the weak excuses that have been made. As usual, ellal and all the others were wrong. How ironic that I, (Mottie the racist according to Ellal), was blaming the white man for death of 39 Asians. I think they should get a life sentence with a minimum of 25 years.

How about you telling us what you think would be a fair sentence?

 

[Notch7]

vagrants lie in their filth in shop doorways

Caused by right wing governments that you support

As usual Andy you are arguing against yourself

 

[Notch7]

Ellal and all the others including you were more interested in turning the thread into an anti Tory/anti Brexit thread yet again. Looking back on some of the comments ‘Ellal and the other's' made you can see all the weak excuses that have been made. As usual, ellal and all the others were wrong. How ironic that I, (Mottie the racist according to Ellal), was blaming the white man for death of 39 Asians. I think they should get a life sentence with a minimum of 25 years.

How about you telling us what you think would be a fair sentence?

What weak excuses?
Be specific.

Innocent before guilty is not an excuse.

 

[Mottie]

How about you telling us what you think would be a fair sentence?

I’ll ask Notch again as he appears to have missed my question. Come on Notch, give us an example of one of your famous swerves....

Edit: Oh, while I was just typing you just have.

 

[SirGalahad]

Or better, pass a law that anybody breaking into someone's home, automatically loses all human rights and the homeowners will not be prosecuted whatever happens.
The burglaries would stop immediately.

You don't really think things through do you. All I need to legally kill someone is invite them to my house say they broke in and kill them and I wont be prosecuted.

I suggest you read the secret barrister and his book / posts about how broken the courts and legal system is due to chronic underfunding.

 

[durhamplumber]

Prisons are full.

Lol....commit a serious crime Notchy...see how quick you end up in one..More Notchy Nonsense.