Crime - part deux.
- Thread starter Sucky
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
It's not unreasonable, my thoughts were more on the topic I was discussing yesterday, where it's taken them 7 years so far to hold anyone responsible for Grenfell, where 72 were actually murdered. I was listening last night where it was suggested it could be the turn of the next decade before anyone faces court. I'm all for the law being applied equally to all.
Won't happen mate we all know that. They'll drag it out and then blame it all on someone who's dead.
Yeah when I saw it all kicking off at the time on tv, I thought then when they started the fires that's going to be a long sentence (for arson). The minimum I would have expected is 2 years and that's at the bottom end of the scale. Although they probably haven't shown all the footage on tv, looking at what they showed a few minutes ago, there must be a few more ****ting their pants right now, when and if they get arrested. Will certainly stop it from ever happening again.
Agreed re your final point ...
The problem is that the rioters being tried right now are being so under emergency powers the Government invoked (via COBRA) specifically to both address and quell 'civil unrest' - which the swift retribution, a lot of it through magistrates courts has undoubtedly done (and is still doing) ...
Grenfell isn't something that could have been dealt with via the magistrates courts and therefore, unfortunately, you get the delays that come with its' complexity and with all of those different parties under the microscope in terms of culpability - also there was no deliberate arson by an easily identified perpetrator... as in today's sentencing ...
All of that said, I do hope Starmer expedite the whole process on Grenfell and that justice is forthcoming sooner rather than later - no better placed PM for doing that, given his legal career...
Hmmm....but some people were not happy that the inquiry even took place, because they knew it would hold up proceedings, which it has done for seven years, only now are cops looking at the criminality side of things. I suppose the question is, who did the inquiry benefit, everyone knows what had happened. You say it wasn't deliberate arson, no but they knew the risk when they were promoting and installing that cladding, so they might not have ignited the fire but they sure as hell contributed towards it, so whether we want to play on the words of arson, murder or whatever, we shouldn't make excuses because one is a scum bag and the others are corporate bosses and mps. We seem to make the excuses for them and accept them, why is it acceptable, if we can fast track one crime, we should not be stalling on another, just because they have money and lawyers on their side, the guy that got 9 years today, rightly, never killed anyone, whereas people at Grenfell have 72 family, loved ones, neihgbours and friends lost, maybe we do need to question the legal system when it can be frustrated in this way.
See what I mean though, we are making excuses for them. I get and understand the message they wanted to put out, and I agree to it, but it should apply to all when it comes to the law.
Fooking hell mate, the IDF having been killing people in their thousands and yet we are cheering for a sentence on someone who killed no one. I know, I know, my brain is all over the place, but it's just how it thinks, we applaud something, but excuse something else when it comes to life and I'm probably just as guilty of that as the rest.
Surely everything is condemnable in equal measures and should face the wheels of justice equally the same, not making the excuses for them on why not.
Anyway, I'll shut up now, I know what you are saying Fosse.
Last edited:
No rioters has been tried ... they have pleaded guilty and we're sentenced. Those pleading not guilty will get trials. Some have been released on bail but most haven't.
I was thinking yesterday this is probably the case, what you just said. Because there was more than just that one guy setting fire to stuff (the one that got nine years) - so there will be more, also whoever the person was that actually set fire to the bin, because that wasn't the guy that got sent down. So those pending trial must be absolutely ****ting it now lol - also there were people who actually went into the hotel as well to cause mayhem. I just don't get what possessed these people, surely they must have realised the sentence for arson and endangering life was going to be heavy a one. It's just bat **** mental. Maybe these type of people don't think, maybe they have no intelligence whatsoever.
Plus don't you get a longer sentence if you go not guilty and are found guilty?
Isn't that a US thing?
But I think you get the intended sentence if found guilty when pleading not. But for shortening the court proceedings and cooperating in the investigation you can get a reduction, so if a case is hopeless a attorney may suggest just go for a guilty plea.
In the US they have full on plea deals which can shorten sentences by unbelievable amounts and even in the case of organised crime can result in you not serving as long as bigger fish are caught.
I think the only sense of plea deal in the UK is they will drop x y z charges if you accept zz charge but that's normally sorted between the prosecution and defence barristers before it gets in the court room.
Yeah, it's the same in the US as a plea deal is sorted between the authorities and the defence beforehand and then the court case is based around said person admitting and explaining everything or naming an individual higher up the food chain.
Or yes, admitting the highest crime and all the minors are waved, reducing time like you said.