Gun and you're in trouble sentence wise full stop.
Not defending it. My missus had a "troubled past" and she's a saint, so she hates that excuse. Sentencing does seem a bit erratic
Guidelines innit? He made the mistake of admitting attempted murder, with a gun I think he had a shit solicitingI'd compare her sentence with that guy who had an episode and went a bit off with the gun. He didn't actually kill anyone, though it was close. He got a lump, I think it was 26 years? He had a troubled past too. Mind you he was also black which adds a tax onto your sentence.
So is community sentencing, which probably costs more. The probation company is a joke, absolute waste.Using prison without it having any real effect is a waste of resources.
And, of course, we aren’t allowed to hope something similar happens to her.They mentioned her troubled past was a factor in the sentencing. Horrible case but don't think she'd had much of a life either. Shit all round
Community sentencing is far cheaper than imprisonment.So is community sentencing, which probably costs more. The probation company is a joke, absolute waste.
According to the report in the local paper at post #697, she admitted the ABH, so she would also have been given a discount on her sentence for pleading guilty. I think the guilty plea discount is 30% so she would have got 27 months if she had been found guilty rather than admitting it.3/ only ABH proved.
The starting point is eighteen months. So she received some discount for pleading guilty (don't know at what stage) and some increase to end up at sixteen months.According to the report in the local paper at post #697, she admitted the ABH, so she would also have been given a discount on her sentence for pleading guilty. I think the guilty plea discount is 30% so she would have got 27 months if she had been found guilty rather than admitting it.
No consent is necessary If official police footage is used in the furtherance of justice if the person is convicted. You have no right to privacy in a police station when under arrest. You will see third parties are sometimes blurred out.I have a general question about this show, its probably been covered already but this thread is 24 pages. How do they get away with filming these people and their crimes in such intimate detail and broadcasting them to the nation? Do the people in question give their consent?
No consent is necessary If official police footage is used in the furtherance of justice if the person is convicted. You have no right to privacy in a police station when under arrest. You will see third parties are sometimes blurred out.
The discount is much lower at trial than closer to first being charged.
The guy who was shagging very young teenage girls a couple of weeks ago without his consent. He'll be a marked man now surely.
They can do it because there is a very limited right to privacy except in private spaces. Advertising and profit are immaterial.Well, its not just 'futherance of justice'. It's one of C4's highest rating programmes and therefore advertisers will be climbing over themselves and paying top dollar to fill the ad breaks. I dont see how they can screen, for example, the guy who was shagging very young teenage girls a couple of weeks ago without his consent. He'll be a marked man now surely.
The starting point is eighteen months. So she received some discount for pleading guilty (don't know at what stage) and some increase to end up at sixteen months.
As above she is not "lucky". The verdict and sentence are spot on the intention of the sentencing council.The discount doesn't have to be actual time off your sentence. In my last case, I plead guilty and my credit was the case not being referred onto Crown. (Mind you, I'm still bitter about the actual sentence. )
The killing in this show.... It reminds me a lot of the one punch deaths you see too often. You know, someone goes out and gets into a row, one punch and their victim falls n hits their head just qt the wrong angle... Hey presto, they're a killer. Them sentences run in years. I get it's within guidelines but it's the summit of a campaign of violence from her.
She lucked out with 16 months, big time. If I were her, I'd start playing the lotto straight out the gate.
Edited to add, i just looked up a case that happened a fair while back outside the football near where I live. Two firms run at each other, one guy chins another and the other fellas brown bread. No intention to kill, explosion of anger etc etc. He only got 4 years. I thought he'd got a lot longer.
As above she is not "lucky". The verdict and sentence are spot on the intention of the sentencing council.
One punch manlaughter is a major concession, not an unfair result.
As I say, the rules were applied precisely in her case.She really is lucky though, in comparison with other similar cases. She also has a record for at least one other offence, committed against the same victim plus substantial police involvement in her life.
I can't speak to women's jails and how they run things inside. I can only use male jails as a rule and 16 months is not enough to address her offending behaviour. That's 8 months of actual time which is a long layin. Alcohol dependency and her serious mental health issues and traumatic past need dealing with really. Perhaps avoiding jail entirely and a sentence in a secure mental health facility would have been better and more compassionate, both for her and her those affected by her crime.
As I say, the rules were applied precisely in her case.
I cannot speak for other examples but most anomalies become clear when the sentencing guidelines are followed.
Most anomalies are caused by ignorance and misunderstandings.
But it is so true. The popular press belly aches about a sentence but in almost all cases the sentencing falls within government approved sentencing guidelines. Now the guidelines may be wrong but that is a political, not legal, problem.Ouch.
Apparently: Garden Productions go into Luton Nick and wire up custody and quite a few strategic offices and other rooms with lots and lots of HD but small CCTV cameras and microphones . They also have teams of camera operators who both float round the building and follow officers and staff outside on jobs. They also have a team of editorial interviewers who ask questions of all those involved on camera. The filming stage doesn’t take very long six weeks or so? But they film hundreds and hundreds (thousands even?) of hours of footage. They will also go out to follow possibly interesting stories in the wider Tri-force consortium (Beds, Herts and Cambs- firearms, MCU- major crimes or ‘murder squad’ and Roads policing traffic- boring). They will also spend a few days in the force control room for background. Finally they do conventional interviews when they have more of an idea of what stories / cases they are going to use. Apparently.I have a general question about this show, its probably been covered already but this thread is 24 pages. How do they get away with filming these people and their crimes in such intimate detail and broadcasting them to the nation? Do the people in question give their consent?
Hey amazing, two more topics that apparently you can be completely fucking wrong about and yet pontificate on. Do your ignorance and arogance have any bounds?No consent is necessary If official police footage is used in the furtherance of justice if the person is convicted. You have no right to privacy in a police station when under arrest. You will see third parties are sometimes blurred out.
The discount doesn't have to be actual time off your sentence. In my last case, I plead guilty and my credit was the case not being referred onto Crown. (Mind you, I'm still bitter about the actual sentence. )
The killing in this show.... It reminds me a lot of the one punch deaths you see too often. You know, someone goes out and gets into a row, one punch and their victim falls n hits their head just qt the wrong angle... Hey presto, they're a killer. Them sentences run in years. I get it's within guidelines but it's the summit of a campaign of violence from her.
She lucked out with 16 months, big time. If I were her, I'd start playing the lotto straight out the gate.
Edited to add, i just looked up a case that happened a fair while back outside the football near where I live. Two firms run at each other, one guy chins another and the other fellas brown bread. No intention to kill, explosion of anger etc etc. He only got 4 years. I thought he'd got a lot longer.
As I say...Most of my erroneous sweeping proclamations are caused by my ignorance and misunderstandings.
Is that where you got the 6+6... I’d have rather gone to the crown and probably get a suspended
They aren’t stupid, they know what they are doing!Yeah, it was them cunts. Admittedly I didn't take my sentence well. I might have kicked off.