Idiot Student Jailed

Heyman_2

Really2 wrote: »

It would not be as likely to kill or injure someone as a 10KG Fire Extinguisher?

But still possible. Should he have faced jail time in that instance? Where does the line get drawn?

I know this is a pretty fruitless line I'm taking , but just interested in exploring opinion about it. :question:

tbs624

Really2 wrote: »

Thats why he did not get a manslaughter or murder sentence.

Ar you saying it is OK for teenages and young adults to try and derail trains as long as no one is injured.

It's a crime simple as that sorry, teenagers get criminal record everyday. If we make no account for wrong doing law is pointless.

Since there is a propensity for people to extrapolate the comments of others and come to the wrong conclusion I'll re-iterate what I said earlier in the thread, that what this young man did was extremely foolish. It is right that he faces sanctions via the court system: my view remains, however, that the sentence was overly harsh.

I don't see that this can be extrapolated to mean I think that its ok for kids to try and derail a train, for example, or that more widely there should be "no account for wrong doing". People should of course face charges/sentences appropriate to their actions. I am sure that the family of Mr Tomlinson would agree with you there.

The fact that teenagers do indeed get criminal sentences on a daily basis does not mean that, on a very basic human level, one cannot think it sad that they have ended up there. That is absolutely not the same as saying that people should not be brought before the courts to account for their wrongdoing.

N1AK

tbs624 wrote: »

I don't think that either act is "socially acceptable"......

And that means a lot, what with you being the embodiment of all society...

It's not acceptable to you, it may not be acceptable to the people who can tolerate your self-centric worldview, but you have no idea whether it is acceptable to society as a whole.

julieq

One of the other factors that has to be taken into account is the overheated and inflammatory rhetoric of the anti-fees activists, which will certainly have contributed to this moment of madness. This wasn't a random vandal dropping bricks off a motorway bridge, it was someone with an oversupply of testosterone being told he was a revolutionary and being whipped up into a single act of utter stupidity. Since then he's clearly realised how stupid it was, he has shown contrition and a degree of responsibility in giving himself up, and he's hardly an ongoing danger to society.

A stiff community service would have done him, and probably most of the rather spoilt children who engaged in the riots and the organisation of the protest in general, a great deal more good. Would at least show him how privileged he is. But it would appear that the justice system still likes the idea of breaking butterflies on wheels.

There are essentially two ways you can organise a criminal justice system, one being redemptive, and the other being punitive. History and geography show the redemptive system is more effective.

StevieJ

tbs624 wrote: »

You're clearly confused - saying that it is a shame that someone such as this lad has "ruined" their own life has nothing to do with a failure of anyone to accept personal responsibility for their actions.

The young man in question did take personal responsibility - he went to the police *and* he pleaded guilty to the charges.

Telling others to "!!!!!!" suggests that you perhaps struggle to get your viewpoint across without resorting to rudeness......

Go easy, he doesn't have much to work with

nicko33

tbs624 wrote: »

<sigh> I suggest you read more about what constitues a charge of "attempted murder"

yes, but murder sells more papers

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Idiot Student Jailed

One down, several thousand to go....

lemonjelly

Of course, had he been a banker he'd still have his civil liberty...
http://www.expressandstar.com/news/2011/01/12/bank-worker-caught-red-handed-with-cash/

vivatifosi

lemonjelly wrote: »

Of course, had he been a banker he'd still have his civil liberty...
http://www.expressandstar.com/news/2011/01/12/bank-worker-caught-red-handed-with-cash/

This idiot has made sure that he'll never be trusted to work for a bank again, in fact he's almost ensured that any jobs he applies for in the future will see his CV rapidly placed in the cylindrical storage on the floor. Even minimum wage jobs such as McDs often have cash handling responsibilities and cleaning jobs leave people working on trust unsupervised.

On reflection I think non-custodial would have been the way to go with fire-extinguisher plonker as well - a lot of hours of community work. Sentencing in this country is a mess. I still think that he was an idiot to throw it off the roof though.

lostinrates

vivatifosi wrote: »

On reflection I think non-custodial would have been the way to go with fire-extinguisher plonker as well - a lot of hours of community work. Sentencing in this country is a mess.

Its been a few years now since I worked as a solicitor's clerk BUT almost without fail if the person is given a sentence of community service they and/or their family, with gushing graitude thank their barrister (and clerk??? ) for getting them/their kid ''Off''. Clearly, when this happens the gravitas of the sentence isn't really appreciated and thus a good portion of the reason for sentence goes over the head and out of the window.

Community service has such potential to be both a good punishment, but also a learning experience. This is severely under used IMO. I appreciate it wouldn't be cheap but I also appreciate a custodial sentence is not cheap. Nor in many cases beneficial.

Now there is a difference in being ''soft on crime'' and wanting fewer custodial sentences. I would like custody to really mean more, but more to the point I'd like non custodial sentences to mean A LOT more and as well as being punitive to be rehabilitationary.