Friday, January 28, 2005

Be a Judge for a Day - Part 2

Thank you to those who replied. The answer is that he got nine years (in the English system that means about six before parole).

My point makes itself. The quality of information reaching the public is either poor or deliberately distorted. In the case of the tabloids I think it is the latter. They have an agenda to push, namely that the out of touch old farts in the system are letting criminals get away with anything.

For the record in the above case (which is true in all important details) the factors the judge referred to were:

Woman alone at night.

Attempt at theft.

Creates fear in community.

Serious injuries.

Weapon used (irrelevant that it was by chance)

Good samaritan attacked and injured.

Attempt to get away.

Late plea of guilty meant that much public money had been spent on legal process. Plea discount therefore restricted to ten percent, rather than thirty for a plea on the first opportunity.

I shall put a few made-up but typical cases on the blog in the next little while, and ask anyone interested to sentence them. I will then tell you the guidelines for that kind of crime, and add my personal take on it.

No comments:

Post a comment

Posts are pre-moderated. Please bear with us if this takes a little time, but the number of bores and obsessives was getting out of hand, as were the fake comments advertising rubbish.