|
|
Post by Dancin on Sept 16, 2024 13:07:03 GMT 1
|
|
|
|
Post by zenfootball2 on Sept 16, 2024 15:55:19 GMT 1
They both should be serving long prison sentence.
how is there sentence a deterrent.
|
|
|
|
Post by filmcrewshrew1 on Sept 16, 2024 16:12:21 GMT 1
Unbelievable to think that a man who has a computer full of sick child porn gets a suspended sentence and a gob sh 1 te who gave a copper some verbal and some fellas selling streaming football matches on firestick, gets an actual prison sentence
What the hell!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2024 16:21:26 GMT 1
What a fall from grace but no sympathy whatsoever from me. I just can't understand what drives men to do this, it's sickening.
|
|
|
|
Post by chirkshrew on Sept 16, 2024 16:23:37 GMT 1
Yep....those 2 should have big prison sentences...but the British justice system is all over the place🤷🤷
|
|
|
|
Post by zenfootball2 on Sept 16, 2024 16:27:39 GMT 1
Yep....those 2 should have big prison sentences...but the British justice system is all over the place🤷🤷 I hope this gets reviewed and they spend time in prison |
|
|
|
Post by ssshrew on Sept 16, 2024 17:22:42 GMT 1
It certainly doesn’t feel like the punishment has fitted the crime. He should have been made an example of to deter others.
However, it is just so typical of our so called justice system that perpetrators get better treatment than their victims. No wonder people like me give up with it all.
|
|
|
|
Post by wakemanender on Sept 16, 2024 17:23:10 GMT 1
The shame and embarrassment for him and his family will be the biggest punishment. It is a life sentence with his face being so well known.
|
|
|
|
Post by ssshrew on Sept 16, 2024 17:24:09 GMT 1
Only in their locality. If he keeps his down everyone else will forget.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Sept 16, 2024 17:27:16 GMT 1
wasnt we giving the death penalty out a few weeks back for looting a bar of soap from Lush ? well done starmer, got your priorities right there NOT |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2024 17:37:46 GMT 1
wasnt we giving the death penalty out a few weeks back for looting a bar of soap from Lush ? well done starmer, got your priorities right there NOT What role did he play in the sentencing? |
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Sept 16, 2024 17:47:43 GMT 1
wasnt we giving the death penalty out a few weeks back for looting a bar of soap from Lush ? well done starmer, got your priorities right there NOT What role did he play in the sentencing? I think he played the starring role www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c2kjdjylnqyo |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2024 18:01:56 GMT 1
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2024 18:19:19 GMT 1
the sentencing guidelines the magistrate worked on were from 2014.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Sept 16, 2024 18:29:05 GMT 1
the sentencing guidelines the magistrate worked on were from 2014. go watch an episode of have I got news for you and be prepared to be shocked by a little thing called satirical humour ps the looters didn't get the death penalty either |
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Sept 16, 2024 18:43:05 GMT 1
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2024 18:48:22 GMT 1
Another example of the two tiered system in this country.
I'm just glad I've never felt compelled to buy a TV license to fund people like this.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Sept 16, 2024 19:00:19 GMT 1
Another example of the two tiered system in this country. I'm just glad I've never felt compelled to buy a TV license to fund people like this. im just glad I wasnt compelled to vote |
|
|
|
Post by mattmw on Sept 16, 2024 19:24:49 GMT 1
The Court notes to the case outlining the sentencing guidance followed can now be found here www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/EDWARDS-SENTENCE-REMARKS-FINAL.pdfSome good legal narrative on the sentencing can also be found on the Secret Barristers Twitter account which helps explain the Courts decision making. Not saying everyone will agree with the judgement but at least it’s good to know the process behind it |
|
|
|
Post by pughywasfree on Sept 16, 2024 20:01:24 GMT 1
Being too scared to leave his house is probably going to be much worse than a comfortable prison sentence on a nonce wing.
I really struggle to understand how so many people find children attractive. It's sick and its worryingly common.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2024 20:11:38 GMT 1
What do people mean by two tiered policing when comparing two cases of people who were arrested and charged and then passed over to the CPS, pleaded guilty and then received sentence.
I genuinely don't understand how that is two tier policing?
Pilch, help us all out here.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Sept 16, 2024 21:16:54 GMT 1
What do people mean by two tiered policing when comparing two cases of people who were arrested and charged and then passed over to the CPS, pleaded guilty and then received sentence. I genuinely don't understand how that is two tier policing? Pilch, help us all out here. heres an example if a welshman drives around Wales like an idiot nothing happens, if an Englishman on the same road hits 21mph in a 20pmh 5 cops jump out of bushes , one deploys a stinger, 1 says boyo, and another issues a speeding penalty there you go |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2024 22:33:00 GMT 1
What do people mean by two tiered policing when comparing two cases of people who were arrested and charged and then passed over to the CPS, pleaded guilty and then received sentence. I genuinely don't understand how that is two tier policing? Pilch, help us all out here. heres an example if a welshman drives around Wales like an idiot nothing happens,  if an Englishman on the same road hits 21mph in a 20pmh  5 cops jump out of bushes , one deploys a stinger, 1 says boyo, and another issues a speeding penalty there you go Wow. |
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Sept 16, 2024 22:44:07 GMT 1
heres an example if a welshman drives around Wales like an idiot nothing happens, if an Englishman on the same road hits 21mph in a 20pmh 5 cops jump out of bushes , one deploys a stinger, 1 says boyo, and another issues a speeding penalty there you go Wow. its true, I was chatting for 5 minutes to a guy in Llanymynech last week , he agreed, I was driving through at the time and he was walking his dog  |
|
|
|
Post by davycrockett on Sept 17, 2024 8:15:43 GMT 1
What do people mean by two tiered policing when comparing two cases of people who were arrested and charged and then passed over to the CPS, pleaded guilty and then received sentence. I genuinely don't understand how that is two tier policing? Pilch, help us all out here. It’s the extreme right catch phrase of the month. |
|
|
|
Post by ProudSalopian on Sept 17, 2024 8:37:08 GMT 1
I'm assuming what Welshshrew is getting at is the fact Huw Edwards was arrested and charged would suggest it's not two tier policing. I understand the anger at the sentencing but that's got nothing to do with policing.
Here is an extract from an article explaining why he got what he got:
Sentencing can be a very finely balanced act
The burning question for many tonight is why was Huw Edwards not sent to prison? The simple answer is ... there is no simple and uniform solution for dealing with offenders.
The offence he committed could in theory lead to 10 years in jail.
But, in practice, detailed sentencing guidelines, developed over years of comparing varying cases, save that severe punishment for the worst of the worst people who are producing the images that Williams scooped up and went on to share. Edwards, by receiving them, was at the bottom of that chain of abuse.
So his sentence was always going to be well short of that maximum 10 years - and, likely to be shorter than the 12 months suspended sentence given to Alex Williams in March.
The guidelines say that for someone in Edwards' position, the starting point is a year in jail with a range of between six months and three years.
Chief Magistrate Paul Goldspring began his sentencing calculation with a year. He knocked three months off to take into account the mental health evidence and the fact that this was a first offence. This is absolutely standard procedure.
He then discounted the sentence by a third, bringing it down to six months, to credit the earliest possible guilty plea.
Again, this discount for an admission is a standard feature of sentencing law. It is an offer to focus an offender’s mind on pleading guilty early and accepting their crimes.
It saves a huge amount of public money by not tying up the criminal justice system with a jury trial. And it means, if the offender is willing, they can get on with the long and hard process of rehabilitation as soon as possible.
The next question was whether Edwards needed to be jailed to protect the public. The chief magistrate concluded not, because he accepted evidence that the offender before him had already understood the gravity of what he had done - and was responding to therapy.
And so he moved down a notch from immediate jail to a suspended six month sentence. That means that if Edwards were to commit another offence in the next two years, he would be likely to go to jail immediately. But if he stays on the road to reform, he Won't.
The prosecution had argued that Edwards needed to be subject to restrictions on his liberties through a Sexual Harm Prevention Order. That would have allowed agencies to monitor or curtail his communications and movements - including knowing his entire internet history on every device he uses.
The court heard that probation experts had used a "predictor tool" to estimate the likelihood of Edwards reoffending. It had found his risk of indirect internet-based offending - meaning viewing more images - to be medium.
But his lawyers argued that risk was diminishing because he was on the mend and had shown genuine remorse.
The chief magistrate said that it was not necessary to subject Edwards to the additional SHPO conditions, given the progress towards rehabilitation already underway.
Edwards must complete a 40-day Sex Offender Treatment Programme and 25 rehabilitation sessions aimed at helping him to fix his mental health and use of alcohol.
Even if all that is successful, there is a sting in the sentencing tail.
For the next seven years Edwards will be on the sex offender register - meaning he has to keep the police informed of his whereabouts. It will be difficult for him to travel abroad on holiday and some countries may never let him in at all.
He’s free from prison - but he is not free in the true sense of the word. His life choices will be watched on and off for years to come.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Sept 17, 2024 9:18:10 GMT 1
I'm assuming what Welshshrew is getting at is the fact Huw Edwards was arrested and charged would suggest it's not two tier policing. I understand the anger at the sentencing but that's got nothing to do with policing. Here is an extract from an article explaining why he got what he got: Sentencing can be a very finely balanced act
The burning question for many tonight is why was Huw Edwards not sent to prison? The simple answer is ... there is no simple and uniform solution for dealing with offenders.
The offence he committed could in theory lead to 10 years in jail.
But, in practice, detailed sentencing guidelines, developed over years of comparing varying cases, save that severe punishment for the worst of the worst people who are producing the images that Williams scooped up and went on to share. Edwards, by receiving them, was at the bottom of that chain of abuse.
So his sentence was always going to be well short of that maximum 10 years - and, likely to be shorter than the 12 months suspended sentence given to Alex Williams in March.
The guidelines say that for someone in Edwards' position, the starting point is a year in jail with a range of between six months and three years.
Chief Magistrate Paul Goldspring began his sentencing calculation with a year. He knocked three months off to take into account the mental health evidence and the fact that this was a first offence. This is absolutely standard procedure.
He then discounted the sentence by a third, bringing it down to six months, to credit the earliest possible guilty plea.
Again, this discount for an admission is a standard feature of sentencing law. It is an offer to focus an offender’s mind on pleading guilty early and accepting their crimes.
It saves a huge amount of public money by not tying up the criminal justice system with a jury trial. And it means, if the offender is willing, they can get on with the long and hard process of rehabilitation as soon as possible.
The next question was whether Edwards needed to be jailed to protect the public. The chief magistrate concluded not, because he accepted evidence that the offender before him had already understood the gravity of what he had done - and was responding to therapy.
And so he moved down a notch from immediate jail to a suspended six month sentence. That means that if Edwards were to commit another offence in the next two years, he would be likely to go to jail immediately. But if he stays on the road to reform, he Won't.
The prosecution had argued that Edwards needed to be subject to restrictions on his liberties through a Sexual Harm Prevention Order. That would have allowed agencies to monitor or curtail his communications and movements - including knowing his entire internet history on every device he uses.
The court heard that probation experts had used a "predictor tool" to estimate the likelihood of Edwards reoffending. It had found his risk of indirect internet-based offending - meaning viewing more images - to be medium.
But his lawyers argued that risk was diminishing because he was on the mend and had shown genuine remorse.
The chief magistrate said that it was not necessary to subject Edwards to the additional SHPO conditions, given the progress towards rehabilitation already underway.
Edwards must complete a 40-day Sex Offender Treatment Programme and 25 rehabilitation sessions aimed at helping him to fix his mental health and use of alcohol.
Even if all that is successful, there is a sting in the sentencing tail.
For the next seven years Edwards will be on the sex offender register - meaning he has to keep the police informed of his whereabouts. It will be difficult for him to travel abroad on holiday and some countries may never let him in at all.
He’s free from prison - but he is not free in the true sense of the word. His life choices will be watched on and off for years to come.
An opportunity for boring point scoring pedanticism doesn't make the reason question go away , just as the debate is live now on national radio 5 , basically why have we made examples of the rioters and hew doesn't go to prison ? , had this been a few years back the question would have included the word "boris" so what goes round comes around |
|
|
|
Post by wakemanender on Sept 17, 2024 11:21:21 GMT 1
I often wonder what Prince Andrew does all day since the scandal that forced him out of Royal Life. Word has it that he has been put in charge of the Royal Corgies. Hugh Edwards will now have the problem of filling his days as leaving the house to pretty well anywhere in the world with his well known face will no doubt result in well deserved abuse. Wouldnt be surprised if he offended again out of boredom.
|
|
|
|
Post by ProudSalopian on Sept 17, 2024 12:01:36 GMT 1
An opportunity for boring point scoring pedanticism doesn't make the reason question go away What question? |
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Sept 17, 2024 12:11:01 GMT 1
An opportunity for boring point scoring pedanticism doesn't make the reason question go away What question? Just the one most of the country is asking |
|
