A top Judge in this country came down squarely on the side of community punishment instead of jail.
The public and media are quick to respond and call him down for being soft on criminals.

I saw this chief Justice anonymously doing community service to get what it was all about.
But who? Are the public to judge the Judges!
He merely said it would be beneficial to keep first time petty criminals out of the jail system.

There are no places in prison in the UK, so they are locking up prisoners in police stations.
Much more lenient sentences are passed by Judges who have their hands tied behind their backs.

I often see cases of sex offenders not going to prison and it hurts me and others, but I am not the Judge, nor is the public or media, and without being in the Court, how could we make a judgement on the Judges qualified position.

One recommendation I am sure you would agree with, is one of being tried under present legislation rather than historic legislation which require accurate dating.

The reasoning behind what I say is this. If the perpetrator evaded the law for so long, he would have caused at least as much, if not more damage to those he abused.

Also there would be grounds for assuming the perp would have got many more who never came forward to testify within the reign of terror they have presided over for many years.

The other thing to note is that they should not get shorter sentences due to age or infirmity.
The longer a perp is free shows just how much terror he put into kids to not tell.

Do you agree?

ste

BTW, its one of the many things that makes me boycott the sun and news of the screws.

Ste,

You hit the nail on the head when you commented that the jails are full. I recall that the limit of 80,000 places in the UK will be hit this week.

It's an odd concept: Justice being based on a lack of space to stuff criminals into, rather than what is really good for society.

Much love,
Larry