NickP Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 [quote user="Quillan"][quote user="pachapapa"] As he is now branded for life as a criminal, he will probably be able to in the months to come enter in to an enthusiastic pursuit of his criminal apprenticeship at a Youth Offenders Institution; leaving such institution a wiser polyskilled individual with a life of profitable criminality to look forward TO.[/quote]I doubt it, he is 18 years old.[/quote]Well one thing less for you to worry about PPP the idiot wont have a student loan to pay back Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulT Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 I thought the charge was lenient - should have been attempted murder and that the sentence was very lenient.Yes, he has ruined his life but he is the one that did it. Why should he have this period of his history erased?Would a future employer want to place him in a position of responsibility?At 18 he knows what the extinguisher could do - he tried to hit a police officer who would have probably been killed.I personally would not like to live in the criminally tolerant society that PPP dreams of.Paul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bugsy Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 [quote user="pachapapa"] It is indeed sad that the risks which MIGHT HAVE ENSUED from a particular action are used as a basis for justifying a particular punishment.[/quote]I have to wonder whether you would use that analogy with someone who fired a gun at someone but missed.This tosser took no account of the potentially fatal danger to others created solely by his actions and should, therefore, face the full severity of the law.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 No matter which way you look at it ,the intent to do harm was there.Age does not come into it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pachapapa Posted January 12, 2011 Author Share Posted January 12, 2011 [quote user="powerdesal"][quote user="pachapapa"] [quote user="powerdesal"]Charity does not come into anything about this case. The scrote got off with a light sentence IMO, attempted murder should be more severely punished.[/quote]Oh Dear. Murder. actus reus + mens rea....The scrote was not charged with murder![/quote] He should have been charged with attempted murder. He deliberately threw the firex from the building roof, knowing full well that there were people below and, if the firex hit someone it would probably (make that very probably) kill them. That he missed was down to good luck. In my book the act was an attemp to kill. At eighteen years old he is certainly old enough to be aware of his actions and the probable results and the act was deliberate.[/quote]Can I pass on this one. Not slightest bit interested. But I wish you luck in rectifying the manifest failings in the CPS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 [quote user="pachapapa"][quote user="powerdesal"][quote user="pachapapa"] [quote user="powerdesal"]Charity does not come into anything about this case. The scrote got off with a light sentence IMO, attempted murder should be more severely punished.[/quote]Oh Dear. Murder. actus reus + mens rea....The scrote was not charged with murder![/quote] He should have been charged with attempted murder. He deliberately threw the firex from the building roof, knowing full well that there were people below and, if the firex hit someone it would probably (make that very probably) kill them. That he missed was down to good luck. In my book the act was an attemp to kill. At eighteen years old he is certainly old enough to be aware of his actions and the probable results and the act was deliberate.[/quote]Can I pass on this one. Not slightest bit interested. But I wish you luck in rectifying the manifest failings in the CPS. [/quote] Sorry do not know what happened here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pachapapa Posted January 12, 2011 Author Share Posted January 12, 2011 [quote user="Joe"][quote user="pachapapa"][quote user="powerdesal"][quote user="pachapapa"] [quote user="powerdesal"]Charity does not come into anything about this case. The scrote got off with a light sentence IMO, attempted murder should be more severely punished.[/quote]Oh Dear. Murder. actus reus + mens rea....The scrote was not charged with murder![/quote] He should have been charged with attempted murder. He deliberately threw the firex from the building roof, knowing full well that there were people below and, if the firex hit someone it would probably (make that very probably) kill them. That he missed was down to good luck. In my book the act was an attemp to kill. At eighteen years old he is certainly old enough to be aware of his actions and the probable results and the act was deliberate.[/quote]Can I pass on this one. Not slightest bit interested. But I wish you luck in rectifying the manifest failings in the CPS. [/quote] Sorry do not know what happened here[/quote]Nor indeed do I know what happened. But you must have known that pressing a button on a computer was a dangerous thing to do and whats more you are over 18 and should know better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pachapapa Posted January 12, 2011 Author Share Posted January 12, 2011 [quote user="Bugsy"][quote user="pachapapa"] It is indeed sad that the risks which MIGHT HAVE ENSUED from a particular action are used as a basis for justifying a particular punishment.[/quote]I have to wonder whether you would use that analogy with someone who fired a gun at someone but missed.This tosser took no account of the potentially fatal danger to others created solely by his actions and should, therefore, face the full severity of the law..[/quote]The sentencing guidelines on the risk of injury are fairly clear but the extension ad absurdum that the extinguisher could have done sequential bounces from head to head finally killing at least 50 persons is a little laboured. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pachapapa Posted January 12, 2011 Author Share Posted January 12, 2011 [quote user="powerdesal"]Would you defend his actions if he had fired a gun at the Police and missed.[/quote]I am not defending his actions; I am criticising the sentencing. NOTE THE USE OF THE GERUND. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pachapapa Posted January 12, 2011 Author Share Posted January 12, 2011 [quote user="Russethouse"]I heard today that the original charge was to be attempted murder. You are on your own, or nearly, on this one PPP[/quote]Being on my own bothers me not. I think therefore I am.The charges preferred to the CPS will include the most serious charges that the circumstances of the case justify; a simple concept in the pursuit of the protection of the public, etc.The Crown Prosecution Service lawyers will review the chances of a successful prosecution in consideration of the public interest. So the Crown Prosecution Service in its ineffable wisdom and with the knowledge of the elements of each charge and the evidence in support of a conviction decided NOT to press charges on the count of attempted murder. I am tempted to introduce the irony of not being picked up by special flight to the gliding club at Thouars in order to......but I will refrain...and remain "nearly on my own" facing the keyboard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Russethouse Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 Being picky about the English language doesn't help your argument Have you a link to any evidence of the judge giving the length of sentence purely to make sure Woollard has a criminal record ?http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/district/newforest/8783067.Student_jailed_for_throwing_fire_extinguisher_off_roof/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gluestick Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 PPP.I fear you have been Googling and Wiki-ing again.Instead of bandying about Latin legal tenets which your clearly do not comprehend you should perhaps read the following simple explanation."Crime is not an homogenous category of conduct. It is a label used to describe a diverse range of conduct that occurs within society that has one feature in common; it is conduct that is prohibited by the state and this prohibition is enforced with the threat of sanction. All crime can be said to fall into two categories; that which is mala in se and that which is mala prohibita (Downes and Rock, 2003). Crimes which are mala in se are those which involve conduct which is wrong in itself in that the conduct would attract the moral condemnation of the majority within society irrespective of whether or not it was conduct that was prohibited by the state. Crimes which are mala in se are those which the majority of individuals in society avoid not merely for fear of the sanction that would be imposed by the state but also because they are in agreement that it is wrong to engage in such conduct. Examples of crimes which are mala in se are those such as murder, rape and theft thus reflecting a strong moral content." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolybanana Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 Surely he was reckless as to the consequences of his act. The question for the jury was whether he ought to have known that his action might cause loss of life, and whether such knowledge was reasonable and within his grasp intellectually, and whether he chucked it knowing this. The answers being positive, a charge of attempted murder is appropriate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pachapapa Posted January 12, 2011 Author Share Posted January 12, 2011 [quote user="woolybanana"]Surely he was reckless as to the consequences of his act. The question for the jury was whether he ought to have known that his action might cause loss of life, and whether such knowledge was reasonable and within his grasp intellectually, and whether he chucked it knowing this. The answers being positive, a charge of attempted murder is appropriate.[/quote]Oh Dear! Honourable Twisted Yellow One you have been mesmerised by Gluey's blackened font.The question for the jury was whether....an english jury is concerned with the verdict of guilty or not guilty....in this case the plaintiff admitted his guilt on the charge preferred by the Crown Proseucution Service....Hey Presto Abracadabra....no jury at all ....the sentencing is the domain of the presiding judge...;and sweet frigging all to do with the jury.Are you sure you are not getting confused with the California Style Arraignment of the Jackson lawyer...a sort of ersatz Grand Jury.Anyway congratulations! You would have done better than the Crown Prosecution Service....hang in there...keep your toes on the board...you and Gluey will go places. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pachapapa Posted January 12, 2011 Author Share Posted January 12, 2011 [quote user="Gluestick"]PPP.I fear you have been Googling and Wiki-ing again.Instead of bandying about Latin legal tenets which your clearly do not comprehend you should perhaps read the following simple explanation."Crime is not an homogenous category of conduct. It is a label used to describe a diverse range of conduct that occurs within society that has one feature in common; it is conduct that is prohibited by the state and this prohibition is enforced with the threat of sanction. All crime can be said to fall into two categories; that which is mala in se and that which is mala prohibita (Downes and Rock, 2003). Crimes which are mala in se are those which involve conduct which is wrong in itself in that the conduct would attract the moral condemnation of the majority within society irrespective of whether or not it was conduct that was prohibited by the state. Crimes which are mala in se are those which the majority of individuals in society avoid not merely for fear of the sanction that would be imposed by the state but also because they are in agreement that it is wrong to engage in such conduct. Examples of crimes which are mala in se are those such as murder, rape and theft thus reflecting a strong moral content."[/quote]For me banging someone on a rendition flight to guantanamo and water-boarding them would be mala in se.For you, the yellow wooly one et Al it would be bona in se.Obviously our strong moral contents are dialectically disparate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolybanana Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 Had this lad been a member of the British National Party (Is that what they are called these days?), I wonder if he would have got a more or less sympathetic hearing from forum members? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolybanana Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 He will do fine in life, as a Sociology professor at one of the Universities whose staff were encouraging this violent behaviour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolybanana Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 [quote user="pachapapa"][quote user="woolybanana"] Surely he was reckless as to the consequences of his act. The question for the jury was whether he ought to have known that his action might cause loss of life, and whether such knowledge was reasonable and within his grasp intellectually, and whether he chucked it knowing this. The answers being positive, a charge of attempted murder is appropriate.[/quote]Oh Dear! Honourable Twisted Yellow One you have been mesmerised by Gluey's blackened font.The question for the jury was whether....an english jury is concerned with the verdict of guilty or not guilty....in this case the plaintiff admitted his guilt on the charge preferred by the Crown Proseucution Service....Hey Presto Abracadabra....no jury at all ....the sentencing is the domain of the presiding judge...;and sweet frigging all to do with the jury.Are you sure you are not getting confused with the California Style Arraignment of the Jackson lawyer...a sort of ersatz Grand Jury.Anyway congratulations! You would have done better than the Crown Prosecution Service....hang in there...keep your toes on the board...you and Gluey will go places.[/quote]The judge has to consider the same issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pommier Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 He was guilty. He's an adult. The prison term seems about right (especially considering that he'll only serve part of the sentence). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salty Sam Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 [quote]Finally, if PPP feels so strongly about this perhaps he would like to put his hand in his pocket to pay for an appeal.[/quote]No need for PPP to dig into his funds. Any appeal is likely to funded at least in part, from the public purse.[quote]Until PPP posted the link to ROA I had no knowledge to the differences between 30 months and 32 months.[/quote]No, probably PPP didn't until he started Googling. No doubt in the next instalment, the barrack-room lawyer* will provide us with a blow by blow account of the workings of the appeal system, but there again it would appear he has already Googled - [quote]In any event you seem to be unaware of the constraints on appeal to a case where the plaintiff has pleaded guilty.[/quote]What constraints? He's unlikely to appeal against conviction, and to save you Googling -[quote]section 9(1) and 11 of the Criminal Appeal Act 1968. Section 9 provides:"(1) A person who has been convicted of an offence on indictment may appeal to the Court of Appeal against any sentence (not being a sentence fixed by law) passed on him for the offence, whether passed on his conviction or in subsequent proceedings."[/quote]*[quote]barrack-room lawyer a person who freely offers opinions, esp in legal matters, that he is unqualified to give.[/quote]Stick to bull fighting! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon-the-censored Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 Wow - I've read this far, forgotten what I was going to say, nearly lost the will to live and am now off to find a Forum where English is the first language.....Simon :-)PS - Lock him up for longer :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pachapapa Posted January 12, 2011 Author Share Posted January 12, 2011 [quote user="Simon-come-lately"]Wow - I've read this far, forgotten what I was going to say, nearly lost the will to live and am now off to find a Forum where English is the first language..... Simon :-) PS - Lock him up for longer :-)[/quote]Read page 7 it's lucky! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pachapapa Posted January 12, 2011 Author Share Posted January 12, 2011 [quote user="woolybanana"][quote user="pachapapa"][quote user="woolybanana"] Surely he was reckless as to the consequences of his act. The question for the jury was whether he ought to have known that his action might cause loss of life, and whether such knowledge was reasonable and within his grasp intellectually, and whether he chucked it knowing this. The answers being positive, a charge of attempted murder is appropriate.[/quote]Oh Dear! Honourable Twisted Yellow One you have been mesmerised by Gluey's blackened font.The question for the jury was whether....an english jury is concerned with the verdict of guilty or not guilty....in this case the plaintiff admitted his guilt on the charge preferred by the Crown Proseucution Service....Hey Presto Abracadabra....no jury at all ....the sentencing is the domain of the presiding judge...;and sweet frigging all to do with the jury.Are you sure you are not getting confused with the California Style Arraignment of the Jackson lawyer...a sort of ersatz Grand Jury.Anyway congratulations! You would have done better than the Crown Prosecution Service....hang in there...keep your toes on the board...you and Gluey will go places.[/quote]The judge has to consider the same issues.[/quote]As whom? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pachapapa Posted January 12, 2011 Author Share Posted January 12, 2011 [quote user="woolybanana"] Had this lad been a member of the British National Party (Is that what they are called these days?), I wonder if he would have got a more or less sympathetic hearing from forum members?[/quote]Wrong metaphor wooly! Despite the self esteem of certain forum members the hearing of a criminal case is most definitely not within their remit.God Forbid it would be worse than a hearing in a Magistrate's Court.Small statistical point a hearing in a Crown Court is rare as over 90% of criminal charges will be heard in a Magistrate's Court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salty Sam Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 [quote user="pachapapa"]God Forbid it would be worse than a hearing in a Magistrate's Court.[/quote]Which just about indicates your knowledge of the Court system within the UK![quote user="pachapapa"]Small statistical point a hearing in a Crown Court is rare as over 90% of criminal charges will be heard in a Magistrate's Court.[/quote]Just to correct you, over 95 per cent of all criminal cases are dealt with in the magistrates' court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.