pigeonshooter76 Posted November 11, 2009 Report Share Posted November 11, 2009 A teenage sex attacker who raped a five-year-old boy just over a week after he was spared a custodial sentence for a child rape was jailed today. The 16-year-old boy, who cannot be named for legal reasons, pleaded guilty to a number of charges against a young child. They included rape and kidnap with intent to commit a sexual offence and attempted rape. Minshull Street crown court in Manchester heard the attack happened in July this year, eight days after he had been given a three-year community order on 26 June for the rape of a seven-year-old boy in Tameside, near Manchester. The original sentence handed down by Judge Adrian Smith prompted an outcry at the time from Greater Manchester police and the Crown Prosecution Service, which launched a legal challenge. Today the boy was detained indefinitely for the public's protection for a minimum of three years before he is eligible for parole. Judge Peter Larkin told him: "The offences you have committed are deeply disturbing and very serious. You are a devious and manipulative young man with an unhealthy and completely unacceptable sexual interest in young boys. It is likely you will not be released for some considerable period of time." The judge said the attacker had lured the boy to his home and cynically taken advantage of him. "You took away his innocence," the judge said. "What you did has had a devastating effect on the boy and his family." The judge said it was highly unusual for a court to categorise a 16-year-old as a danger to the public, but in this case it was merited. "I have to say I have absolutely no hesitation whatsoever in reaching the conclusion that you are indeed a dangerous offender," he added. The boy was sentenced to three years and four months, but with the time he has already spent in custody taken into account, he will serve a minimum of two years and 359 days before he is eligible for parole. Larkin also revoked the community rehabilitation order passed by Smith and resentenced the teenager for the earlier rape against the seven-year-old boy. For the earlier offence he was given three years and four months to run concurrently. He was also banned from working with children and placed on the sex offenders register. When sentencing the teenager for the first rape, the other judge is believed to have taken into consideration the views of the victim's family, who forgave him because of their Christian beliefs. But the three-year community order prompted an appeal by the Crown Prosecution Service and the police. At the time, the CPS said: "It is rare to lodge these kind of sentence appeals with the attorney general, but we felt very strongly about this case. We appealed two days after he received his sentence; unfortunately he committed another assault eight days later." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pigeonshooter76 Posted November 11, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 11, 2009 makes me sick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fullbore Posted November 11, 2009 Report Share Posted November 11, 2009 oh my god, there was a time when our goverment and judicial system were the envy of the World, I despair Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myzeneye Posted November 11, 2009 Report Share Posted November 11, 2009 we discussed ***** like this in the garry glitter/capital punishments thread.... this ***** is precisely the type of scum that should swing for what they've done. some folk on here dont agree, i can only imagine how the father of the victim feels, let alone the poor little mite who has been ruined for life as a result of this ***** actions. bring back justice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdubya Posted November 11, 2009 Report Share Posted November 11, 2009 Good them judges eh! they give a community sentence to a rapist and jail a couple who swindle an insurance company ( who in all reality have swindled everyone else) to 5 and 6 years in jail. amazing thing was a guy on sky news was attempting to justify the original judges decision not to impose custodial sentence saying that jail does not "benefit" young offenders? I don't want it to benefit them I want it to bloody hurt them to the point the evil little scroats wont do it again? what with this report and the panorama programme the other night where it showed that police cautions have been given to rapists and those guilty of abh and gbh simply to save time and cost and play the numbers game, no wonder confidence in the judicial system is at an all time low. KW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bicykillgaz Posted November 11, 2009 Report Share Posted November 11, 2009 ****** like this are a waste of life and tax payers money don't bother locking him up just bring back firing squads Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robalex Posted November 11, 2009 Report Share Posted November 11, 2009 Sickening! I beleive that chemical castration, as punishment for these heinous crimes, should be handed down. It could take away the urge to commit these offences and may save other youngsters from harm. Hopefully, other like-minded miscreants would think twice before commiting these vile crimes but we'll probably never know. Rob. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lloyd90 Posted November 11, 2009 Report Share Posted November 11, 2009 9mm to the back of the head and jobs done :blink: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mungler Posted November 11, 2009 Report Share Posted November 11, 2009 The offender clearly isn't wired up right. So, do we put him in a system, spend fortunes on rehabilitation and never be assured that he's safe for release. All that time, energy and money could be applied elsewhere to a more deserving project of course. **** knows what the answer is, but it's got to start with chemical castration and protection of the general public. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bicykillgaz Posted November 11, 2009 Report Share Posted November 11, 2009 Sickening! I beleive that chemical castration, as punishment for these heinous crimes, should be handed down. It could take away the urge to commit these offences and may save other youngsters from harm. Hopefully, other like-minded miscreants would think twice before commiting these vile crimes but we'll probably never know. Rob. thats getting off a bit lightly and costly bring back hanging, i'm redundant at the minute ill kick the stool from under them for enough to cover the mortgage, it would be nice to get some job satisfaction too :blink: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billy. Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 One more vote for chemical castration. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roadkill Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 one vote here for the bullet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MM Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 All the knee jerk reactions at once hey. Mungler pointed out that he is not a full shilling. Would you string up everybody with mental health issues? Murder, in whatever guise, is never right, and morally wrong. And i know the 'What if it was your child' question keeps popping up, so i dont know what i would feel. Im not sure if i could keep my head if it was one of mine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
docholiday Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 Mind you I dont fancy his chances much in prison. must stand a good chance of being killed or comiiting suicide Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdubya Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 All the knee jerk reactions at once hey. Mungler pointed out that he is not a full shilling. Would you string up everybody with mental health issues? Murder, in whatever guise, is never right, and morally wrong. And i know the 'What if it was your child' question keeps popping up, so i dont know what i would feel. Im not sure if i could keep my head if it was one of mine. er he did it TWICE mate ,once again after being given the benefit of the dought and the chance of allowing the soft liberal morally higher than thou brigade to have their way, that in my eyes makes an opinion on what to do with him not quite a "knee jerk" so my take is he is obviously a danger to kids, he will never be a "right" in society, so do the honarable thing for him and others and give him a nice injection that he wont wake up from. KW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
natcot Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 Would you string up everybody with mental health issues? String them up, chop them up, shot them, burn them, I don't care. Health issues or not, anyone doing that kind of thing to my family wouldn't be spending much more time on this earth if I got hold of them, regardless of the consequences for me. I appreciate that the death penalty is moral mine field, but people that abuse children like this sicken me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marlin vs Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 De-knuck him, then hang him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fullbore Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 All the knee jerk reactions at once hey. Mungler pointed out that he is not a full shilling. Would you string up everybody with mental health issues? Murder, in whatever guise, is never right, and morally wrong. And i know the 'What if it was your child' question keeps popping up, so i dont know what i would feel. Im not sure if i could keep my head if it was one of mine. No I believe Mungler SPECULATED "that he clearly isn't wired up right" And he advocated chemical castration, which is fair, in line with current cost cutting I could easily be swayed to go the two house brick route, provided I could keep my thumbs out of the way Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robmiller Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 yep castration does it for me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulf Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 Castration and send him down Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billy. Posted November 13, 2009 Report Share Posted November 13, 2009 I think that castration is by far the best way. People say the death penalty etc, but in my eyes, that's just an easy escape. Imagine being sat in a cell for the rest of your life; you've been chemically castrated and any sexual cravings you would have got, no longer there. So you will constantly be sat there in remorse, as you will not get 'turned on' by stuff that got you put in jail in the first place. I would far rather put someone through that than the death penalty. Solitary confinement will ensure that not a second of your life goes by without you thinking about why you're there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackpowder Posted November 13, 2009 Report Share Posted November 13, 2009 Sickening! I beleive that chemical castration, as punishment for these heinous crimes, should be handed down. Most farmers would be able to provide a quicker ,cheaper , permanent solution. Blackpowder Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myzeneye Posted November 13, 2009 Report Share Posted November 13, 2009 (edited) well, i for one am not happy having my HARD EARNED tax money spent keeping this animal locked up. chemical catration is a good realistic option, but as i said, why should i/we pay for his jail term and supervision.its just a waste of resouces that could be better spent elsewhere. whether he is of sound mind or not, im not impressed with the options we currently have available. bullets to the head, hanging etc all seem a bit like revenge or morally wrong perhaps.... but the lethal injection should be the solution for these sc\umbags.... no malice, no revenge , just game over you broke the rules and you must pay with your life. Edited November 13, 2009 by myzeneye Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sambu13 Posted November 13, 2009 Report Share Posted November 13, 2009 good.gif One more vote for chemical castration. Why Chemical? why not just chop the lot of? I'll personally volunteer! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frenchieboy Posted November 13, 2009 Report Share Posted November 13, 2009 Why Chemical? why not just chop the lot of? I'll personally volunteer! Got to agree. A blunt knife and no anesthetic should be the only treatment for these perverts! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.