Author Topic: Surely the question should be  (Read 4949 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Baldy

  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 14085
  • Reputation: 0
Re: Surely the question should be
« Reply #60 on: April 15, 2015, 06:06:34 PM »
I'm sorry but if an individual is 'almost too dangerous to be sent to prison' doesn't that mean he should NOT be allowed to go free with just a slap on the wrist and orders to attend a relationship management course.  Banghead

Quote
After a trial at Halton Magistrates' Court, she told him: 'You acted like a caveman, dragging the victim by her hair and assaulting her over a period of months between April and September.
'You are almost too dangerous for me to send you to prison because you need work done on you.


Call me heartless but I'd say that he should have the 'work' done to him while locked away from any other potential victims.  noooo:

Serve the public trust
Protect the innocent
Uphold the law

Well out of a potential score of 3 you manage sweet FA with that decision.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3040062/Thug-repeatedly-attacked-girlfriend-dangerous-jail.html


 Banghead Banghead

Offline Steve

  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 29914
  • Reputation: -1
Re: Surely the question should be
« Reply #61 on: April 15, 2015, 08:41:50 PM »
I'm sorry but if an individual is 'almost too dangerous to be sent to prison' doesn't that mean he should NOT be allowed to go free with just a slap on the wrist and orders to attend a relationship management course.  Banghead

Quote
After a trial at Halton Magistrates' Court, she told him: 'You acted like a caveman, dragging the victim by her hair and assaulting her over a period of months between April and September.
'You are almost too dangerous for me to send you to prison because you need work done on you.


Call me heartless but I'd say that he should have the 'work' done to him while locked away from any other potential victims.  noooo:

Serve the public trust
Protect the innocent
Uphold the law

Well out of a potential score of 3 you manage sweet FA with that decision.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3040062/Thug-repeatedly-attacked-girlfriend-dangerous-jail.html


 Banghead Banghead
Banghead Banghead Banghead
Well, whatever nevermind

Offline Grumpmeister

  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 19959
  • Reputation: -24
  • Prankmeister General
Re: Surely the question should be
« Reply #62 on: May 03, 2015, 10:12:19 AM »
A convicted child rapist who fled his country to avoid prison with five arrests over here for assault, GBH and attempted rape before beating and sexually assaulting an 89 year old is being given a secret home to protect his 'human' rights despite the fact that if the police had done their jobs properly he would have already been deported.

A human wouldn't rape a child, a human wouldn't beat and sexually assault women. These are the actions of a depraved animal who should either be put down or locked away for the rest of his life in order to protect the public, he should certainly not be given a home and have his details suppressed so that his victims or the people unwittingly living nearby aren't placed at risk.

Why the hell are the rights of the criminal more important than those of the victims or potential victims.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/574551/Romanian-rapist-could-strike-again-secret-home-protect-rights

Life is all about finding people that are your kind of crazy.

Offline Barman

  • Administrator
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 116053
  • Reputation: -40
  • Since 1960...
    • Virtual Pub!
Re: Surely the question should be
« Reply #63 on: May 03, 2015, 10:45:41 AM »
A convicted child rapist who fled his country to avoid prison with five arrests over here for assault, GBH and attempted rape before beating and sexually assaulting an 89 year old is being given a secret home to protect his 'human' rights despite the fact that if the police had done their jobs properly he would have already been deported.

A human wouldn't rape a child, a human wouldn't beat and sexually assault women. These are the actions of a depraved animal who should either be put down or locked away for the rest of his life in order to protect the public, he should certainly not be given a home and have his details suppressed so that his victims or the people unwittingly living nearby aren't placed at risk.

Why the hell are the rights of the criminal more important than those of the victims or potential victims.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/574551/Romanian-rapist-could-strike-again-secret-home-protect-rights


 noooo:
Pro Skub  Thumbs:

Offline apc2010

  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 47294
  • Reputation: -2
Re: Surely the question should be
« Reply #64 on: May 03, 2015, 12:43:02 PM »
A convicted child rapist who fled his country to avoid prison with five arrests over here for assault, GBH and attempted rape before beating and sexually assaulting an 89 year old is being given a secret home to protect his 'human' rights despite the fact that if the police had done their jobs properly he would have already been deported.

A human wouldn't rape a child, a human wouldn't beat and sexually assault women. These are the actions of a depraved animal who should either be put down or locked away for the rest of his life in order to protect the public, he should certainly not be given a home and have his details suppressed so that his victims or the people unwittingly living nearby aren't placed at risk.

Why the hell are the rights of the criminal more important than those of the victims or potential victims.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/574551/Romanian-rapist-could-strike-again-secret-home-protect-rights


 noooo: noooo:

Offline barmisspah?

  • Fool Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1029
  • Reputation: 1
    • Photobucket
Re: Surely the question should be
« Reply #65 on: May 05, 2015, 03:17:30 PM »
A convicted child rapist who fled his country to avoid prison with five arrests over here for assault, GBH and attempted rape before beating and sexually assaulting an 89 year old is being given a secret home to protect his 'human' rights despite the fact that if the police had done their jobs properly he would have already been deported.

A human wouldn't rape a child, a human wouldn't beat and sexually assault women. These are the actions of a depraved animal who should either be put down or locked away for the rest of his life in order to protect the public, he should certainly not be given a home and have his details suppressed so that his victims or the people unwittingly living nearby aren't placed at risk.

Why the hell are the rights of the criminal more important than those of the victims or potential victims.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/574551/Romanian-rapist-could-strike-again-secret-home-protect-rights


Hear hear
I couldn't ask for better friends. I could ask for more NORMAL friends, but not better ones.

Offline Marley's Ghost (Imbiber of Spirits)

  • Fool Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4917
  • Reputation: 0
  • What a dead end job . .
Re: Surely the question should be
« Reply #66 on: May 06, 2015, 10:26:30 AM »
A convicted child rapist who fled his country to avoid prison with five arrests over here for assault, GBH and attempted rape before beating and sexually assaulting an 89 year old is being given a secret home to protect his 'human' rights despite the fact that if the police had done their jobs properly he would have already been deported.

A human wouldn't rape a child, a human wouldn't beat and sexually assault women. These are the actions of a depraved animal who should either be put down or locked away for the rest of his life in order to protect the public, he should certainly not be given a home and have his details suppressed so that his victims or the people unwittingly living nearby aren't placed at risk.

Why the hell are the rights of the criminal more important than those of the victims or potential victims.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/574551/Romanian-rapist-could-strike-again-secret-home-protect-rights


Hear hear


It's just another example of the contempt we're held in by these metropolitan elite scroungers . . .

We don't matter to them - unless there's an election in the offing, at which point they will lie even more imaginatively . . .
"Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end." 

Well, someone had to say it!

Offline Grumpmeister

  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 19959
  • Reputation: -24
  • Prankmeister General
Re: Surely the question should be
« Reply #67 on: May 06, 2015, 05:59:50 PM »
What the hell do you mean you can't help her, you could easily argue that this man needs psychiatric treatment so use the section of the Mental Health Act that allows you to detain someone for assessment. Given that he was convicted for indecent exposure and deliberately performing sex acts in full view of her, not to mention that when his home was raided they found a hoard of illegal weapons including machine guns there is more than enough justification to consider placing him in a secure unit for the forseeable future.

Quote
A feud between the neighbours began in 2002 when she installed a gate on the lane at the entrance to both properties.
This prompted a near decade-long campaign of terror, with Ward following Miss Dunford wearing only socks, shouting abuse and knocking on her windows.

Despite repeated complaints to police, the authorities acted only when Miss Dunford supplied them with hours of CCTV footage.
When police raided Ward’s property in 2011 they found a cache of weapons, including machine guns.

The pervert admitted 11 counts of exposure, three charges of possessing a prohibited firearm and a range of other firearm offences.

A Sexual Offences Prevention Order prohibiting Ward from going within 200m of Miss Dunford’s home was made, but the order was changed by Judge Peter Armstrong at a later hearing, allowing Ward to approach the property from all sides.
k

And yet again another judge, completely removed from the real world, puts the priorities of the criminal ahead of the victim. After all, if this guy was no danger to Miss Dunford then the police wouldn't have given her £5k to install CCTV and build a panic room because they can't protect her.

The whole 'we can't do anything about this until he does something violent' crap has been a major issue for years now. A while ago an ex of my sister decided to take his frustrations out on my parents as dad worked away. This meant that mum had 6 months of the little shite vandalising the back gate, driving past slowly when she walked the dog and hundred of abusive and threatening phone calls. So trusting in the system they contacted the police and gave them the evidence they had collected (mainly recordings of the phone calls that had been left on the answerphone). And what happened? We ended up with a pathetic excuse for a constable that made PeeWee Herman look like Dirty Harry and spent each time he was there saying that there was nothing they could do and then talking about HIS personal problems.

My question is a simple one, why the hell aren't we making sure that the public can be protected from people making serious threats BEFORE they escalate into violence? Oh of course, silly me that would take away some of the all important rights of the criminal.  cussing:
Life is all about finding people that are your kind of crazy.

Offline Grumpmeister

  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 19959
  • Reputation: -24
  • Prankmeister General
Re: Surely the question should be
« Reply #68 on: April 01, 2016, 10:52:11 AM »
Are you taking the piss? Prison should be as unpleasant as possible in order to shock the scrotes into obeying the law, yes give them opportunities to develop new skills so that they have a chance of finding work afterwards but the idea of making custody as close as possible to life in the community in order to make it more civilised is a slap in the face to the victims of their crimes.

Quote
The measures are crucial to the vision of Justice Secretary Michael Gove, who has called for a prisons revolution, bolstering rehabilitation and educating inmates to end the ‘lock ’em up or let ’em out’ debate.


Yes rehabilitation is important but there also has to be a fear of being locked up again, turning prisons into little more than holiday camps for criminals isn't going to improve crime rates as they aren't going to give a toss about ending up in prison again.

Quote
In an internal teleconference call to prospective staff, Mr Trent said: ‘We’re looking at how we can make the experience as normal as possible. They’re also going to have a phone in their room so they can ring their children at night and say goodnight. That’s pretty normal.’

He said the aim of the prison was to ‘offer hope’ to inmates and ‘change behaviour through reward, rather than punishment’, adding: ‘I don’t call the men in custody prisoners and I don’t call them offenders.

‘Because it’s a basic principle, isn't it? If you call somebody something you don’t want them to be, they’re more likely to be it. The rooms in which they live, calling them rooms rather than cells is really important. And if you call it a room, how do you make a cell a room? And that’s giving them ownership of it and how they live in there and how they keep it clean and tidy.


If you call someone something that you don't want them to be it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy? Are you fucking serious? You are an ex Royal Marine, look at the training you went through and tell me that even though parts of it would have been hell on earth you weren't a better person for having gone through it. THAT is the approach we should be using, especially when they are getting to the end of their sentence.

Yet again we see the results of having a cabinet minister with absolutely no experience or qualifications germane to his position.  Banghead

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3518316/The-cushiest-jail-Britain-Prisoners-phones-rooms-say-goodnight-children-warders-knock-entering.html

For the love of God please tell me that this is an April Fool's article.  noooo:
« Last Edit: April 01, 2016, 11:26:23 AM by Grumpmeister »
Life is all about finding people that are your kind of crazy.

Offline Steve

  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 29914
  • Reputation: -1
Re: Surely the question should be
« Reply #69 on: April 01, 2016, 01:50:49 PM »
Are you taking the piss? Prison should be as unpleasant as possible in order to shock the scrotes into obeying the law, yes give them opportunities to develop new skills so that they have a chance of finding work afterwards but the idea of making custody as close as possible to life in the community in order to make it more civilised is a slap in the face to the victims of their crimes.

Quote
The measures are crucial to the vision of Justice Secretary Michael Gove, who has called for a prisons revolution, bolstering rehabilitation and educating inmates to end the ‘lock ’em up or let ’em out’ debate.


Yes rehabilitation is important but there also has to be a fear of being locked up again, turning prisons into little more than holiday camps for criminals isn't going to improve crime rates as they aren't going to give a toss about ending up in prison again.

Quote
In an internal teleconference call to prospective staff, Mr Trent said: ‘We’re looking at how we can make the experience as normal as possible. They’re also going to have a phone in their room so they can ring their children at night and say goodnight. That’s pretty normal.’

He said the aim of the prison was to ‘offer hope’ to inmates and ‘change behaviour through reward, rather than punishment’, adding: ‘I don’t call the men in custody prisoners and I don’t call them offenders.

‘Because it’s a basic principle, isn't it? If you call somebody something you don’t want them to be, they’re more likely to be it. The rooms in which they live, calling them rooms rather than cells is really important. And if you call it a room, how do you make a cell a room? And that’s giving them ownership of it and how they live in there and how they keep it clean and tidy.


If you call someone something that you don't want them to be it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy? Are you fucking serious? You are an ex Royal Marine, look at the training you went through and tell me that even though parts of it would have been hell on earth you weren't a better person for having gone through it. THAT is the approach we should be using, especially when they are getting to the end of their sentence.

Yet again we see the results of having a cabinet minister with absolutely no experience or qualifications germane to his position.  Banghead

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3518316/The-cushiest-jail-Britain-Prisoners-phones-rooms-say-goodnight-children-warders-knock-entering.html

For the love of God please tell me that this is an April Fool's article.  noooo:
Sadly I doubt it is such.  It is Gove we're talking about

Well, whatever nevermind

Offline Grumpmeister

  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 19959
  • Reputation: -24
  • Prankmeister General
Re: Surely the question should be
« Reply #70 on: August 08, 2016, 02:07:31 PM »
You would think that after all this time without an escape making it into the news that it is just possible those in charge have learned their lesson and stopped sending violent thugs to open prisons....

Guess again.  Banghead

Quote
Gavin Owens, 33, absconded from HMP Hollesley Bay in Suffolk, where he was serving an indeterminate sentence for slashing a man's throat during a 2008 street fight.

He was jailed for attempted murder, GBH and ABH following the vicious attack.   


So attempted murder isn't enough to get someone sent to a proper prison then? I wonder how many people will fall foul of this shitehawk before he ends up back in custody.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3729297/Dangerous-prisoner-serving-life-sentence-slashing-man-s-throat-street-fight-run-escaping-open-prison.html

Life is all about finding people that are your kind of crazy.

Offline Barman

  • Administrator
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 116053
  • Reputation: -40
  • Since 1960...
    • Virtual Pub!
Re: Surely the question should be
« Reply #71 on: August 08, 2016, 02:18:31 PM »
You would think that after all this time without an escape making it into the news that it is just possible those in charge have learned their lesson and stopped sending violent thugs to open prisons....

Guess again.  Banghead

Quote
Gavin Owens, 33, absconded from HMP Hollesley Bay in Suffolk, where he was serving an indeterminate sentence for slashing a man's throat during a 2008 street fight.

He was jailed for attempted murder, GBH and ABH following the vicious attack.   


So attempted murder isn't enough to get someone sent to a proper prison then? I wonder how many people will fall foul of this shitehawk before he ends up back in custody.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3729297/Dangerous-prisoner-serving-life-sentence-slashing-man-s-throat-street-fight-run-escaping-open-prison.html


 noooo:
Pro Skub  Thumbs:

Offline Steve

  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 29914
  • Reputation: -1
Re: Surely the question should be
« Reply #72 on: August 08, 2016, 02:56:01 PM »
You would think that after all this time without an escape making it into the news that it is just possible those in charge have learned their lesson and stopped sending violent thugs to open prisons....

Guess again.  Banghead

Quote
Gavin Owens, 33, absconded from HMP Hollesley Bay in Suffolk, where he was serving an indeterminate sentence for slashing a man's throat during a 2008 street fight.

He was jailed for attempted murder, GBH and ABH following the vicious attack.   


So attempted murder isn't enough to get someone sent to a proper prison then? I wonder how many people will fall foul of this shitehawk before he ends up back in custody.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3729297/Dangerous-prisoner-serving-life-sentence-slashing-man-s-throat-street-fight-run-escaping-open-prison.html


 noooo:

 noooo: noooo:

This may be all my fault.  I have long advocated 'throw away the key' sentencing for scum like this, maybe I should have said it clearer as  "throw away the key but keep the lock"
Well, whatever nevermind