|
Post by bracknellboy on Dec 6, 2021 21:59:47 GMT
From that Sentencing Council blog explainer... "Unlawful act manslaughter is charged when death occurs due to a criminal act which a reasonable person would realise must subject some other person to at least the risk of some physical harm."That seems to be the most appropriate charge, given there's no suggestion he was actually directly culpable for the death, doesn't it? He received virtually the full sentence possible. 21yrs vs 24 max. And, again, he will not be released early unless and until he convinces a parole board that he is no danger, and he will not even be eligible for many year... Appalling taste in partners is not, yet, a criminal offence. I'd look them both up and throw away the key. Or lock them both up...I would put a winking emoji here, but it feels just terribly inappropriate. I doubt there are few that would disagree with you. Nonetheless, the prosecution can only charge in accordance with the definitions of crimes in law. The jury can only give a verdict in accordance with those charges. And the judge can only sentence in accordance with the charges they have been found guilty of and the sentencing guidelines for those offences. Of course they have a degree of liberty within those sentencing guidelines. But if they were to go outside by being more severe than the guidelines, the defendants' lawyers would immediately be able to challenge them (for no better reason than they are outside the guidelines). It seems reasonably clear that in case of the murderer, the judge is pretty much at the top end: I think from what I saw (from what adrianc posted) that to be at the 30 year level it would have needed to be shown that there was 'sadistic motivation' ["the murder of a child if involving the abduction of the child or sexual or sadistic motivation"], as it would not fall under the other categories for that sentence. Regardless of what we may think of the individual, it would seem the prosecution was unable to make that case. I don't even know whether they tried to make that case for the purposes of sentencing. I would not be entirely surprised if the judge would have preferred to have imposed stronger sentences but felt they could not. They may have felt it was 'smarter' to impose sentences that were within - i.e. a touch below the top end oft the guidelines and thereby give wiggle room for the Attorney General to challenge - than it was to go above and thereby only give grounds for the defence to challenge. Perhaps better to have the AG argue that he sentencing guidelines simply haven't catered for this sort of exceptional case and that a higher tariff should be imposed, than have the defence argue that the sentence is not consistent with the guidelines and should be reduced. Just mindless ramblings from someone who is equally perplexed and upset by the abhorrent behaviours of some members of their own species.
|
|
|
Post by bernythedolt on Dec 7, 2021 2:37:27 GMT
What about the child's father, where was he? I would find him equally guilty by being totally oblivious, or turning a blind eye. It was his son and he should have protected him. That poor little soul, it makes you weep. But my question is where were the police and social services? After the number of reports of bruises and other worries being reported by concerned family members, where were the follow ups? One visit from each service and that was the end of it? Something stinks here and heads need to roll.
|
|
ozboy
Member of DD Central
Mine's a Large One! (Snigger, snigger .......)
Posts: 3,156
Likes: 4,830
|
Post by ozboy on Dec 7, 2021 13:23:18 GMT
What about the child's father, where was he? I would find him equally guilty by being totally oblivious, or turning a blind eye. It was his son and he should have protected him. That poor little soul, it makes you weep. But my question is where were the police and social services? After the number of reports of bruises and other worries being reported by concerned family members, where were the follow ups? One visit from each service and that was the end of it? Something stinks here and heads need to roll. The inevitable end results of decades of very successful and blindly applied Politically Correct Woke Brainwashing? Same reasons as to why the Rotherham and numerous other grooming gangs flourished for so long, and still flourish? Allegedly.
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,210
Likes: 6,015
|
Post by registerme on Dec 7, 2021 13:40:35 GMT
I'd imagine that underinvestment was more of a problem than any "woke" agenda.
|
|
|
Post by bernythedolt on Dec 7, 2021 13:56:52 GMT
That poor little soul, it makes you weep. But my question is where were the police and social services? After the number of reports of bruises and other worries being reported by concerned family members, where were the follow ups? One visit from each service and that was the end of it? Something stinks here and heads need to roll. The inevitable end results of decades of very successful and blindly applied Politically Correct Woke Brainwashing? Same reasons as to why the Rotherham and numerous other grooming gangs flourished for so long, and still flourish? Allegedly. Police too busy investigating the long list of newly dreamed up "hate crimes", "micro-aggressions" and all the other nonsense they are now saddled with?
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,891
Likes: 2,767
|
Post by michaelc on Dec 7, 2021 13:59:12 GMT
This case has again led me to think about capitol punishment. Throughout my life I've been against it so the _sole_ reason of the risk of wrongful conviction.
I'm starting to wonder if this can be mitigated by firstly by vastly reducing the type of crimes that would fall into the capitol basket. Secondly, by introducing a new conviction test such as "beyond ANY doubt".
Then if we as a state are going to put them to death there is zero point in doing so "humanely" as the purpose is punishment and to a lesser extent deterrent. No lethal injections for such people. The electric chair or the noose awaits...
|
|
ozboy
Member of DD Central
Mine's a Large One! (Snigger, snigger .......)
Posts: 3,156
Likes: 4,830
|
Post by ozboy on Dec 7, 2021 14:06:46 GMT
I'd imagine that underinvestment was more of a problem than any "woke" agenda. Personally, I don't buy that, at all. There have been numerous followups in numerous numbers of "Social Services" cases, where nothing is/was ever done, and "underinvestment" isn't anywhere near the reason, it's the "attitude", IMHO.
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,210
Likes: 6,015
|
Post by registerme on Dec 7, 2021 14:28:47 GMT
|
|
ozboy
Member of DD Central
Mine's a Large One! (Snigger, snigger .......)
Posts: 3,156
Likes: 4,830
|
Post by ozboy on Dec 7, 2021 14:38:39 GMT
Unfortunately, "underinvestment" isn't remotely a reason why numerous followups in numerous numbers of "Social Services" cases have resulted in nothing ever being done?
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,210
Likes: 6,015
|
Post by registerme on Dec 7, 2021 14:54:25 GMT
If you want to criticise Social Services in general, its management, local governments' piss poor management, central governments piss poor management etc then I'd be be right there with you.
If you want to reject out of hand the idea that underinvestment / lack of resourcing contributes to poorly trained overworked and demoralised staff (including management), and that this in turn is part of the problem, then I'm afraid we'll have to disagree.
It's never not been a problem. And whilst I agree that what some might label "woke" policies contributed to problems like those seen in Rotherham the fact is that we saw failings in the provision of child care / health / safety / protection long before anybody even knew "woke" was a concept.
The NSPCC was founded in 1884. I'm pretty sure there wasn't much of a "woke agenda" back then!
|
|
ozboy
Member of DD Central
Mine's a Large One! (Snigger, snigger .......)
Posts: 3,156
Likes: 4,830
|
Post by ozboy on Dec 7, 2021 15:18:00 GMT
If you want to criticise Social Services in general, its management, local governments' piss poor management, central governments piss poor management etc then I'd be be right there with you. If you want to reject out of hand the idea that underinvestment / lack of resourcing contributes to poorly trained overworked and demoralised staff (including management), and that this in turn is part of the problem, then I'm afraid we'll have to disagree. It's never not been a problem. And whilst I agree that what some might label "woke" policies contributed to problems like those seen in Rotherham the fact is that we saw failings in the provision of child care / health / safety / protection long before anybody even knew "woke" was a concept. The NSPCC was founded in 1884. I'm pretty sure there wasn't much of a "woke agenda" back then!So why are the failings getting demonstrably worse? To me, there is a crystal clear and permeating "attitude" problem, so, yep, we disagree. "It's the Tory Cuts!"
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 9,011
Likes: 4,821
|
Post by adrianc on Dec 7, 2021 15:37:44 GMT
If you want to criticise Social Services in general, its management, local governments' piss poor management, central governments piss poor management etc then I'd be be right there with you. If you want to reject out of hand the idea that underinvestment / lack of resourcing contributes to poorly trained overworked and demoralised staff (including management), and that this in turn is part of the problem, then I'm afraid we'll have to disagree. It's never not been a problem. And whilst I agree that what some might label "woke" policies contributed to problems like those seen in Rotherham the fact is that we saw failings in the provision of child care / health / safety / protection long before anybody even knew "woke" was a concept. The NSPCC was founded in 1884. I'm pretty sure there wasn't much of a "woke agenda" back then!So why are the failings getting demonstrably worse? To me, there is a crystal clear and permeating "attitude" problem, so, yep, we disagree. "It's the Tory Cuts!" Local government funding has been totally slashed over the last decade in the name of "austerity". They are all running the bare minimum services, those that are legally mandatory, on an absolute shoestring. I know for a fact that the cuts mean my own county's council is £100m behind on road repairs, while their rural support grand from central government went down from £60m in 2010 to £600k last year. So, yes, the cuts are definitely contributing to failures in social care. The failings in adult social care are very well known. The failings in children's social care will certainly have played a part in this case, along with so many others.
|
|
keitha
Member of DD Central
2024, hopefully the year I get out of P2P
Posts: 3,875
Likes: 2,313
|
Post by keitha on Dec 7, 2021 15:41:30 GMT
For me and knowing some Social Workers and having worked alongside others.
One thing that always comes out of these reviews is a "back covering" attitude from management, So in some cases as well as entering the data into the computer systems they are required to file type written minutes etc of every contact into a paper file, the council I worked with would not accept a printout of what had been entered into the computer system. stupidly management were happy if the SW cut what was in the computer system and pasted that into a new document. one unfortunate issue is that should documents be required both the filed hard copy and the computer record have a nasty habit of going missing.
So social workers have more paperwork to do which means unless we have more of them they can't do as many visits.
Also from personal experience social workers tend not to look too hard behind the facade
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 7, 2021 15:48:51 GMT
the truth is that 40 years ago, either a liitle old lady would have reported this to the police and the kid removed to a council home where he would be alive but probably very distorted
or
nothing, he would have just died
because we don't know how many kids died unaturally 40 years ago, how many got fiddled with or how many got mangled
now we know
I suspect life is much better as adults are no longer scared by war or religion
adults are now scared by drugs and by lack of family, drug polution needs removal
it is very easy to follow the press and distract our energies in the wrong direction, the problem that needs stamping on is illegal drugs
|
|
james100
Member of DD Central
Posts: 990
Likes: 1,196
|
Post by james100 on Dec 7, 2021 16:03:13 GMT
If you want to criticise Social Services in general, its management, local governments' piss poor management, central governments piss poor management etc then I'd be be right there with you. If you want to reject out of hand the idea that underinvestment / lack of resourcing contributes to poorly trained overworked and demoralised staff (including management), and that this in turn is part of the problem, then I'm afraid we'll have to disagree. It's never not been a problem. And whilst I agree that what some might label "woke" policies contributed to problems like those seen in Rotherham the fact is that we saw failings in the provision of child care / health / safety / protection long before anybody even knew "woke" was a concept. The NSPCC was founded in 1884. I'm pretty sure there wasn't much of a "woke agenda" back then!So why are the failings getting demonstrably worse? To me, there is a crystal clear and permeating "attitude" problem, so, yep, we disagree. "It's the Tory Cuts!" Unfortunately the NSPPC is not what it once was (from 2019): www.rollonfriday.com/news-content/exclusive-barrister-forces-charity-commission-probe-nspcc-over-workplace-porn-shoot Of course under funding is a huge issue with multiple consequences. But I also think there is more to it than that. Looks like I agree with both of you!
|
|