Cop dismayed at thugs lenient sentences
Discussion
http://icnorthwales.icnetwork.co.uk/d
See headline item.
"http://icnorthwales.icnetwork.co.uk/d
First part reads:
A POLICEMAN yesterday criticised a judge for the lenient sentences given to six yobs who battered him and stabbed his teenage son.
PC William Howie, an officer for 27 years, said the sentencing of the gang, who launched a vicious attack outside his home, sent out the wrong message to the public.
He also said the sentences, by Recorder Gareth Jones at Mold Crown Court, could have serious implications for all police officers.
See headline item.
"http://icnorthwales.icnetwork.co.uk/d
First part reads:
A POLICEMAN yesterday criticised a judge for the lenient sentences given to six yobs who battered him and stabbed his teenage son.
PC William Howie, an officer for 27 years, said the sentencing of the gang, who launched a vicious attack outside his home, sent out the wrong message to the public.
He also said the sentences, by Recorder Gareth Jones at Mold Crown Court, could have serious implications for all police officers.
Edited by Tafia on Tuesday 8th May 10:53
Reading not very far between the lines it looks like no one could identify who actually carried out the serious parts of the assault, so, frankly, what did this bloke expect? You can't jail people for standing next to a bloke who stabs someone. If you can't identify the stabber, you can't send the whole lot of them to prison until someone owns up.
It is not the judge's fault (and indeed it may be no one's fault at all) if the prosecution can't find the evidence required to obtain convictions for the stabbing.
It is not the judge's fault (and indeed it may be no one's fault at all) if the prosecution can't find the evidence required to obtain convictions for the stabbing.
Bing o said:
ATG said:
If you can't identify the stabber, you can't send the whole lot of them to prison until someone owns up.
Maybe it's time to change the law then - I mean, it's an offence not to name the driver of a speeding car (S172) why not someone who stabs someone with a bottle?
ATG said:
If someone committed a stabbing with my knife, I might reasonably expect to take some responsibility for the stabbing. But it is obviously daft to think I ought to take any responsibility for a stabbing just because I was nearby.
What if it could be proved that you were one of a group of people all engaged in a violent action in which one of you stabbed someone? That was the thrust of my point...metaphorically speaking!
Bing o said:
ATG said:
If someone committed a stabbing with my knife, I might reasonably expect to take some responsibility for the stabbing. But it is obviously daft to think I ought to take any responsibility for a stabbing just because I was nearby.
What if it could be proved that you were one of a group of people all engaged in a violent action in which one of you stabbed someone? That was the thrust of my point...metaphorically speaking!
I happen to agree with Bing-o...isn't it 'aiding and abetting' - if you were positively identified as among a group, ONE OF WHOM stabbed someone, then you should have an obligation to identify that person. Not precisely like that, but surely it could be made closer than it currently is...
Bing o said:
havoc said:
you should have an obligation to identify that person.
If it's good enough for speeding motorists, then surely its good enough for a mob of scum who beat up an off duty officer?
Maybe not, this is Britain after all....
ATG said:
Of course not. If the law is going to treat me fairly after an incident like that, the consequence is that it can't require yobs to testify against each other nor hold them jointly responsible for the harm done.
Where is the fairness for the victims? I would argue that if you are part of a group that sets out to attack someone/a group, and by one of your actions you all become culpable unless someone is willing to testify against an individual.
There is a major pack mentality that means groups can act with impunity at the moment.
ATG said:
Bing o said:
havoc said:
you should have an obligation to identify that person.
If it's good enough for speeding motorists, then surely its good enough for a mob of scum who beat up an off duty officer?
Maybe not, this is Britain after all....
I wasn't suggesting any analogy with motorists (although others were). And I take your point entirely. However, where groups of lads are hanging around together and 'acting with impunity', there could be argued some sort of communal responsibility - as Bing o says, it's the 'pack mentality' that causes a lot of this - the peer pressure, the bravado that they get when they have numbers on their side.
I AM in two minds about this
- on the one hand there have been too many abrogations of human rights in this country recently. Fact.
- but on the other hand the powers that be seem unable or unwilling to deal with the growing problem of packs of teenagers (and early-20s) who roam around day/night doing what they like to who they like. My brother and a friend were hospitalised by one such group a couple of years back who were just off on a violence spree...and not the first, according to the police, who actually knew who they were! The same night they set on a bloke in a bus-stop who as a result lost his eye. Yet despite witnesses they were never prosecuted for any of the attacks that night.
There is ONE partial answer, and that is to take the US approach to trespass...namely you have the right to take any necessary action. The only concern there is it MAY lead to escalation...and then deaths, not hospitalisations.
Final thought...if it had been slightly different and the copper had waded in and rescued two kids being attacked on his doorstep, but in the process had to hospitalise a couple of the thugs, who'd like to bet AGAINST said copper being up on charges right now, with a bunch of 'witnesses' from the group of thugs?!?
Bing o said:
ATG said:
Of course not. If the law is going to treat me fairly after an incident like that, the consequence is that it can't require yobs to testify against each other nor hold them jointly responsible for the harm done.
Where is the fairness for the victims? I would argue that if you are part of a group that sets out to attack someone/a group, and by one of your actions you all become culpable unless someone is willing to testify against an individual.
There is a major pack mentality that means groups can act with impunity at the moment.
ATG said:
The courts exist to judge the accused fairly, not to be fair or unfair to victims. Group punishments and guilt by association have no place in a civilised country. We don't lower our standards just because we've got some scum to deal with. If the price of being just is that no one is punished for this stabbing, then so be it. That is a price worth paying.
Weren't all six involved in the violence? They were all actively involved in intending to cause harm. They succeeded.
I don't see how the result is fair to anyone - they have learnt how to get around the legal process, their criminal record will make it hard for them to seek employment so will probably commit more crime, and a family is left failed by the system that they have served for 27 years.
Justice - not in my name.
ATG said:
The courts exist to judge the accused fairly, not to be fair or unfair to victims. Group punishments and guilt by association have no place in a civilised country. We don't lower our standards just because we've got some scum to deal with. If the price of being just is that no one is punished for this stabbing, then so be it. That is a price worth paying.
But if you can have accessory to murder, why not accessory to GBH? Everyone in the group that was committing the assault becomes an accessory...and if they don't like it, they should get better friends! As a teenager I would NEVER have stayed with a group that was attacking someone, so why NOT start punishing those who do?!? The cause of violence in these instances is the 'pack mentality' / 'peer pressure', so lets target the cause, and try and break these groups up!
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff