If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
"Danger to public" rapist gets five years
BillieTheBot
Posts: 8,735 Bot
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/wear/6158416.stm
So even if you do get the conviction, you don't get justice.
Five years for that...it should be life, without parole.
Just to make this a discussion, does anyone actually think that the rape laws in this country are worth the paper they're written on?
So even if you do get the conviction, you don't get justice.
Five years for that...it should be life, without parole.
Just to make this a discussion, does anyone actually think that the rape laws in this country are worth the paper they're written on?
Beep boop. I'm a bot.
0
Comments
make more sense?
I know its the minimum, but there is no way they will keep him there for a life sentence.
Ah ok, i missed it on the first read.
Nope.
That said I still think 5 years is way to low for a minimum tarrif.
Its FAR too low for such a horrible crime!
I appreciate that its a life sentence, with the various life restrictions that entails, and I don't normally think that life should mean life, but a minimum tariff that low is a disgrace.
It's no wonder most rape victims don't bother reporting.
I thought with life sentences the minimum tarrif is the amount before they can be considered for parole? has that changed?
I guess just have to wait and see how long he actually does serve.
It is an insult to the victim though
But he raped someone.
And:
And the judge in that article describes him as a dangerous man.
It's always been half the suggested minimum tariff, as with all other sentences, AFAIK.
"assault by penetration" means he raped her anally too, for the record.
And the reasons why I don't think rape and murder should have attract a death sentence are purely practical. The death penalty costs more, the judicial system makes mistakes, and its often more torturous to leave someone locked up for eternity. Plus, with rape if you have the same maximum sentence for rape as murder you'll find that rapists will start to get their money's worth, as it were, and kill their victims- it makes no difference to them.
Rapists and murderers deserve to feel real agony and they deserve to be wiped off the planet. I don't know how anyone can disagree with that.
Two wrongs don't make a right, a long jail sentence will suffice me.
Fair play to the people that helped capture him but the court's just wasted all that effort.
Out of touch liberal judges probably.
We should elect some of our judges as is the case in some US states. Wouldn't be a bad idea to elect police chiefs too. (Those too lazy to give a shit at the moment might be brought into line if their bosses jobs depended on it).
Unlikely, there was something in the legal press a little while ago about how the general public tend to give more lenient sentences than judges because they are taken in more by the bleatings of the defendants.
Castration (chemical or otherwise) wouldn't work because the rapist would just use something else to cause harm- rape isn't primarily done for sexual thrill.
Unlikely, there was something in the legal press a little while ago about how the general public tend to give more lenient sentences than judges because they are taken in more by the bleatings of the defendants.
Castration (chemical or otherwise) wouldn't work because the rapist would just use something else to cause harm- rape isn't primarily done for sexual thrill.
I don't think it would be right because mistakes happen and its hard to pardon a dead man, but if there was a way of proving guilt 100% I wouldn't have any moral or ethical problem with executing them in a suitably painful way.