Jump to content





Photo
- - - - -

Stuart Hall - Jailed for 15 months


  • Please log in to reply
61 replies to this topic

#21 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 17,059 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 07:32 PM

It's crazy and I don't care that he might feel hard done by, the law is an ass in this case.

 

If instead of your 3 point fine and £60, you were hit with 5 points and £100, you'd get no sympathy from anyone if you started "But, it's not fair...". It's only introduction of the word "flogging" that makes your point. And it would be absurd to flog anyone for a speeding offence at any time.

That's not the point though, if the judge had not imposed concurrency of sentences then he'd have gone down for 9 and a half years as that's what all the sentences totalled up make.

 

Edited to change 5 years to 9 years.


Arguing with the forum trolls is like playing chess with a pigeon.  No matter how good you are, the bird will **** on the board and strut around like it won anyway


#22 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 17,059 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 07:33 PM

Also, can the rest of you please self-moderate?  If I have to bin your posts I'll not be best pleased.


Arguing with the forum trolls is like playing chess with a pigeon.  No matter how good you are, the bird will **** on the board and strut around like it won anyway


#23 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 17,059 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 08:30 PM

A broad brush delete of all the posts that are dragging it off into pettiness.


Arguing with the forum trolls is like playing chess with a pigeon.  No matter how good you are, the bird will **** on the board and strut around like it won anyway


#24 Johnoco

Johnoco
  • Coach
  • 20,333 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 08:37 PM

A pathetic sentence.

#25 l'angelo mysterioso

l'angelo mysterioso
  • Coach
  • 42,176 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 08:48 PM

A pathetic sentence.

I very much agree

see previous posts


WELCOME TO THE ROYSTON VASEY SUPER LEAGUE 2015
Keeping it local

#26 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,307 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 09:04 PM

That's not the point though, if the judge had not imposed concurrency of sentences then he'd have gone down for 9 and a half years as that's what all the sentences totalled up make.

 

Edited to change 5 years to 9 years.

And that would have been some justice but even so just because the courts didn't take this kind of crime very seriously in the "dark ages" doesn't mean that they shouldn't now.



#27 Trojan

Trojan
  • Coach
  • 15,299 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 09:06 PM

BBC News link

 

"Hall's barrister Crispin Aylett, in mitigation, told the court the former broadcaster had "all of 13" victims compared to Jimmy Savile's 1,300."

 

Only 13 victims, that's all right then, he should have been let off with a caution and told not to do it again.  Sometimes you have to wonder what planet barristers are on with mitigation pleas like that.

 

I'm definitely not one of the hang 'em bunch when it comes to sentencing but I'd have thought 15 months was a bit light.

 

According to Norman Tebbit Savile wasn't such a bad lad anyway

 

"I've got no doubt Jimmy Savile was a very odd fellow, and I'm pretty sure he was in breach of the law on a number of matters. But I do not know that it's possible, 40 years on, to do justice in the sense of knowing just how many of those allegations are complete and true."

His wife is nodding as he goes on: "Jimmy did a great deal of good, as well as wrong. And in anybody's life, you have to look at both sides of the ledger."

http://www.guardian....ebbit-interview


"Your a one trick pony Trojan" - Parksider 10th March 2013

#28 guess who

guess who
  • Coach
  • 4,046 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 11:09 PM

No wonder people have no faith in the system.

 

He should hang for what he had done.



#29 fieldofclothofgold

fieldofclothofgold
  • Coach
  • 5,824 posts

Posted 18 June 2013 - 01:57 AM

13 victims?he must have had access to lots of children in all those years on its a knockout.15 months is not long enough, he will be out before Christmas


but you and I weve been through that and this is not our fate.
So let us so let us not talk falsely now.
The hour is getting late
FROM 2004,TO DO WHAT THIS CLUB HAS DONE,IF THATS NOT GREATNESSTHEN i DONT KNOW WHAT IS.

JAMIE PEACOCK

#30 Derwent

Derwent
  • Coach
  • 8,073 posts

Posted 18 June 2013 - 07:43 AM

I noted in the judge's remarks that he referred to meetings between Hall's defence team and the CPS and then yesterday it emerged that charges of rape were allowed to lie on file. Lying on file means that the CPS did not drop the charges but opted not to pursue them in court. I can't help thinking that Hall's change of plea to guilty on the molestation charges was part of a deal to avoid the more serious rape charges.

#31 amh

amh
  • Moderator
  • 11,086 posts

Posted 18 June 2013 - 08:10 AM

or as he was sticking to not guilty on the rape charge, save the alleged victim from giving evidence?


Whilst I do not suffer fools gladly, I will always gladly make fools suffer

A man is getting along on the road of wisdom when he realises that his opinion is just an opinion


#32 Derwent

Derwent
  • Coach
  • 8,073 posts

Posted 18 June 2013 - 08:16 AM

 

or as he was sticking to not guilty on the rape charge, save the alleged victim from giving evidence?

Perhaps, but I suspect Hall's lawyers took advantage of the plea bargaining opportunity hence his unexpected change of plea.

#33 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,307 posts

Posted 18 June 2013 - 08:51 AM

or as he was sticking to not guilty on the rape charge, save the alleged victim from giving evidence?

Hard to imagine that someone capable of such despicable behaviour suddenly developed a conscience.


Edited by Northern Sol, 18 June 2013 - 08:51 AM.


#34 Futtocks

Futtocks
  • Coach
  • 21,560 posts

Posted 18 June 2013 - 09:08 AM

I really hope there's some legal loophole for that sentence to be challenged.

A mind is like a parachute. It doesn’t work if it isn’t open. Frank Zappa (1940 - 1993)


#35 JohnM

JohnM
  • Coach
  • 20,608 posts

Posted 18 June 2013 - 09:11 AM

I have to admit, I have never understood this issue of concurrent sentences. It's cropped up on a number of occasions..seems daft to me.

 

As for Hall's sentence, isn't this an opportunity for restorative justice to be added to his sentence, especially as I understand that the sentence is already under review?

 

see http://www.guardian....-attacks-review


Edited by JohnM, 18 June 2013 - 09:12 AM.


#36 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,307 posts

Posted 18 June 2013 - 09:15 AM

In handing down concurrent prison sentences, the judge gave Hall "a 25% discount" for his guilty plea.

There's his motivation for "coming clean".



#37 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 17,059 posts

Posted 18 June 2013 - 09:17 AM

I have to admit, I have never understood this issue of concurrent sentences. It's cropped up on a number of occasions..seems daft to me.

 

As for Hall's sentence, isn't this an opportunity for restorative justice to be added to his sentence, especially as I understand that the sentence is already under review?

 

see http://www.guardian....-attacks-review

What makes it especially daft is that you can get 8 months for telling a lie about a speeding ticket but slightly under double that for 14 serious sexual assaults.  If you ran through three speeding cameras then you get three speeding tickets, it's never treated as one act of speeding, I can't see why they'd ever want to treat Hall's level of offences any more leniently.


Arguing with the forum trolls is like playing chess with a pigeon.  No matter how good you are, the bird will **** on the board and strut around like it won anyway


#38 Cutsyke Raiders

Cutsyke Raiders
  • Coach
  • 435 posts

Posted 18 June 2013 - 09:52 AM

Apparently if you call  Judge Russell a "fat crank" though you will instantly get 2 years

 

http://www.thefreeli...RT.-a0118611656



#39 Shadow

Shadow
  • Coach
  • 8,119 posts

Posted 18 June 2013 - 09:55 AM

Apparently if you call  Judge Russell a "fat crank" though you will instantly get 2 years

 

http://www.thefreeli...RT.-a0118611656

To be fair, less jailed for insulting the judge more for being a total nobber.


God Rides a Harley but the Devil rides a Ducati!

#40 Cutsyke Raiders

Cutsyke Raiders
  • Coach
  • 435 posts

Posted 18 June 2013 - 10:02 AM

To be fair, less jailed for insulting the judge more for being a total nobber.

Agreed, but 2 years for mild abuse and acting the goat in court? 






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users