Am I the only one who thinks this sentence is too light?

[henry d]

2 hours ago, old man said:

Sadly, this is the likely consequence of the law abiding being shown no regard under the law.

The consequence could be that the law abiding are enticed into criminal ways due to their position and rights under the law being constantly ignored?

Then they are not law abiding, they are then the same as the guy who thinks he can assault someone, it doesn't matter that they felt frustrated by what they thought was a lenient sentence. 

[old'un]

21 minutes ago, henry d said:

Then they are not law abiding, they are then the same as the guy who thinks he can assault someone, it doesn't matter that they felt frustrated by what they thought was a lenient sentence. 

There is a point when law abiding people will brake the law, even you would.

[Velocette]

2 hours ago, old'un said:

There is a point when law abiding people will brake the law, even you would.

Don't hold your breath,,literally, old'un. He wouldn't even break wind for fear it would contribute to climate change or offend someone somewhere in the world !

[henry d]

12 hours ago, Velocette said:

Don't hold your breath,,literally, old'un. He wouldn't even break wind for fear it would contribute to climate change or offend someone somewhere in the world !

Well you know best as your from Yorkshire 🙌

[old man]

15 hours ago, henry d said:

Then they are not law abiding, they are then the same as the guy who thinks he can assault someone, it doesn't matter that they felt frustrated by what they thought was a lenient sentence. 

That is not the issue henry,

The issue IMO, is that due to the constant failures of the judiciary for whatever reason this will inevitably destabilise society further?

In my experience the only action that may reverse criminality is deprivation not reward?

[henry d]

5 minutes ago, old man said:

That is not the issue henry,

The issue IMO, is that due to the constant failures of the judiciary for whatever reason this will inevitably destabilise society further?

In my experience the only action that may reverse criminality is deprivation not reward?

And in mine deprivation leads to criminality, and deprivation and reward are not antonyms of each other

[old man]

3 minutes ago, henry d said:

And in mine deprivation leads to criminality, and deprivation and reward are not antonyms of each other

You are very welcome to your belief.

[Scully]

If we reintroduced the death penalty then it would have the benefit of the offender no longer feeling deprived, nor able to reoffend. It’s a win win in my book. 👍

[henry d]

1 hour ago, Scully said:

If we reintroduced the death penalty then it would have the benefit of the offender no longer feeling deprived, nor able to reoffend. It’s a win win in my book. 👍

Yeah, it really works well on the guilty and the innocent, check out the wiki page on wrongful convictions in the US. Juan Rivera in 1992 is a real peach, there was blood on his shoes from the girl, but the problem was the shoes weren`t available in the US until after the murder, you have to wonder how intent on geting a result the law enforcement officials are at times!

[Scully]

8 minutes ago, henry d said:

Yeah, it really works well on the guilty and the innocent, check out the wiki page on wrongful convictions in the US. Juan Rivera in 1992 is a real peach, there was blood on his shoes from the girl, but the problem was the shoes weren`t available in the US until after the murder, you have to wonder how intent on geting a result the law enforcement officials are at times!

But we’re not discussing Juan Rivera, we’re discussing a piece of dirt who sucker punched a father for a laugh and killed him. Are you suggesting he’s innocent Henry? 

[henry d]

Nope, you are twisting it. He was convicted of manslaughter not murder, so was given that sentence which was in the ballpark for such things. You brought up that the death penalty and I showed how poor we are with whole life and death penalties in the US, the UK don`t have the death penalty but we are still paying out millions to wrongly convicted people.

[Scully]

5 hours ago, henry d said:

Nope, you are twisting it. He was convicted of manslaughter not murder, so was given that sentence which was in the ballpark for such things. You brought up that the death penalty and I showed how poor we are with whole life and death penalties in the US, the UK don`t have the death penalty but we are still paying out millions to wrongly convicted people.

I don’t care what he was convicted of; he killed a bloke and laughed about it. He wouldn’t be laughing now if he were facing the death penalty nor would some unfortunate be meeting a possible similar fate some time in the future. 

I have absolutely no doubt we’ll be reading about this piece of dirt again in the future, when he kills someone else.

If he had done this to a relative of yours and received a token slap on the wrist as a result, I wonder if you’d still be as charitable. I couldn’t rest at night in such circumstances. 

There are many cases of killers released to kill again. That may sit ok with you but not me. 

 

[Rewulf]

7 hours ago, henry d said:

Nope, you are twisting it. He was convicted of manslaughter not murder, so was given that sentence which was in the ballpark for such things. You brought up that the death penalty and I showed how poor we are with whole life and death penalties in the US, the UK don`t have the death penalty but we are still paying out millions to wrongly convicted people.

Terrible isn't it when someone gets wrongly convicted? 

But it's even worse when someone gets released early or not even jailed at all, then goes on to kill, maim, assault or rape, destroying more lives in the process. 

Manslaughter carries a maximum sentence of life in prison, but you say this sentence was in 'the ballpark'? 

No remorse whatsoever, laughed about it, and hoped he would die? Nice. 

How about this one. 

"We can now reveal that a member of a grooming gang who sexually abused eight young girls is a convicted murderer with a history of violence against women

Mohammed Ahsen (35) was jailed for life in March 2006 for the murder of 19-year-old club-goer Kimberly Fuller, who he stabbed at the Escape nightclub in Ship Hill four months earlier.

Ahsen admitted three counts of indecent assault at the start of the trial of six other men, which concluded last month with guilty verdicts on 20 counts including rape, indecent assault and child abduction.

The sentences mean more than 500 years of prison terms have been imposed on defendants in trials relating to Operation Clover and Operation Stovewood, the two major investigations sparked by the damning Jay report in 2014.

Ahsen, formerly of Finlay Road in Eastwood, knifed Thorpe Hesley care worker Kimberly after she accused him of touching her bottom.

He was ordered to serve a minimum of 19 years — later reduced to 17.

Ahsen — aged 21 and married at the time — had dropped the knife on a staircase as he left Escape and went to another club with a friend.

Kimberly had surgery on a three-inch wound to her neck at Rotherham Hospital but doctors were unable to save her.

At the 2006 sentencing in Sheffield, Judge Roger Keen branded Ahsen — previously jailed for threatening a former partner with a knife — “bad tempered, vicious and violent towards people, particularly women”.

The court heard that Kimberly’s last words to her mother were: “Mum, stop worrying. I’m 19 now.”

Her family later campaigned for airport-style metal detectors and scanners in nightclubs and backed a nationwide knife amnesty.

Five years prior to murdering Kimberly, when Ahsen was aged between 16 and 18, he indecently assaulted three girls aged under 16 in Rotherham and Maltby.

He admitted the offences this year after being charged by the National Crime Agency as part of their investigation into child abuse.

He was also charged with raping a Sheffield schoolgirl twice between 2000 and 2001 — but these charges were not progressed by the NCA after the alleged victim was found dead last year.

A court order made by Judge Michael Slater at the outset of the latest trial barred the press from reporting on Ahsen’s case, with no time-frame given when this would be lifted.

It was successfully applied for, and this restriction to be lifted after the outcome of the trial of six other men.

Following last month’s latest convictions, which saw five men sentenced to a total of 63 years, the overall jail time handed down to 38 defendants is 529 years and three months, including concurrent terms.

And this will rise when Ahsen and another defendant whose sentences were adjourned last month are dealt with.

https://theukdatabase.net/2019/09/12/mohammed-ahsen-rotherham/

[henry d]

2 hours ago, Scully said:

I don’t care what he was convicted of; he killed a bloke and laughed about it.

Ok, dealing with this first. He laughed so should he be treated differently to someone who may not have laughed but still didn't care about the consequences of their actions? No one can look into the inner workings of the human brain, how can we discern the difference?

 

[Rewulf]

7 minutes ago, henry d said:

Ok, dealing with this first. He laughed so should he be treated differently to someone who may not have laughed but still didn't care about the consequences of their actions? No one can look into the inner workings of the human brain, how can we discern the difference?

 

That makes no sense whatsoever. 

If you can't see the wrong in what you have done, then there's every possibility of you doing it again. 

If he had said to the court, ' I don't care, I'll do that again as soon as I get out' would you still think the sentence appropriate? 

The nan has demonstrated no remorse, and callous disregard for his actions and the consequences, but you're OK with that? 

Unbelievable. 

[Scully]

6 minutes ago, henry d said:

Ok, dealing with this first. He laughed so should he be treated differently to someone who may not have laughed but still didn't care about the consequences of their actions? No one can look into the inner workings of the human brain, how can we discern the difference?

 

No, neither of the two examples you give should be treated any differently. Both should be put down.