Don't know how it works in England, but if I (as a government ) had a law against perverting the course of justice - and, if for some reason the court did not accept that I would add to the law a new section that would define any action that could conceivably slow down or sidetrack a police investigation as perverting the course of justice. If such is already present in the law, that act the "artist" did is clearly covered.
You be the judge (sentencing)
- Thread starter anglolawyer
- Start date
Don't know how it works in England, but if I (as a government ) had a law against perverting the course of justice - and, if for some reason the court did not accept that I would add to the law a new section that would define any action that could conceivably slow down or sidetrack a police investigation as perverting the course of justice. If such is already present in the law, that act the "artist" did is clearly covered.
anglolawyer
Banned
Yo LashL!
I shall give the results for cases A and B in about three hours from now. Case C I expect to conclude within a couple of days.
1) 10 years picking oakum at her Majesty's pleasure. While walking the treadmill!!
2)Life eating oakum at her Majesty's pleasure.
3)Having his little head guillotined right off - and having to calculate the length of time it took for the blade to cut all the way through as it was happening, in seconds, to 5 decimal places. If correct, 5 years picking oakum at her Majesty's etc. If incorrect 14 years (symbolic, ehhh!)............
2)Life eating oakum at her Majesty's pleasure.
3)Having his little head guillotined right off - and having to calculate the length of time it took for the blade to cut all the way through as it was happening, in seconds, to 5 decimal places. If correct, 5 years picking oakum at her Majesty's etc. If incorrect 14 years (symbolic, ehhh!)............
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2012
- Messages
- 16,222
Great threads
Graffiti - Fine £500. Compensation order to railways of £5000. Community service of 500 hours specifically cleaning up graffiti. Five year exclusion order banning entry to any railway property or using the railways at all.
Perverting Justice - Fine £500. Community service of 50 hours.
I know this one and I would have given him a 2 year prison sentence but would have suspended it so he would not go to prison unless he did something else. I think there were 13 victims so I would order compensation to them of £20k each.
Fine £5000. Sex Offenders Register and supervision for 5 years. Ban from working with anyone under the age of 18 for 5 years. Two year suspended sentence.
I am basing all of the above on risk to the public and I see none of them as posing a direct risk to the public, so no prison time. They all have money, so hit them in the pocket with fines and compensation orders. Keep them away from where or who they were offending against, except the elderly man as he had already shown he had stopped offending long before he was caught.
Mojo
Mostly harmless
Generally, I think, a sentence for perverting (or attempting to pervert) the course of justice is applied consecutively, because it is regarded as a separate course of action from the original offence.
Interesting thread. Interesting outcomes.
I'll take 5 years on C. The Student/Teacher thing will get you in trouble even if the child is over the age of consent. And sex is rarely consider appropriate therapy for suicidal thoughts, though I think that is prudish thinking.
applecorped
Banned
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2008
- Messages
- 20,145
I agree, he did vote for Obamacare.
Totalcolour
New Blood
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2012
- Messages
- 8
10 years in the electric chair?
Totalcolour
New Blood
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2012
- Messages
- 8
Sex offenders nearly always repeat, so harsher judgements are required. Look at Larry Singleton. He raped and chopped off a girls arms, and after he was released (after serving his time) he went on to repeat and added murder to his crime.
I'm not sure how much a man in his eighties could do though. So, probation, and a hefty fine, and something to each of the victims.
The teacher: well, although the girl was underage, I really think that the girl has to take some responsibility. At that age they have "some" idea of what they are doing. (I know I did at that age). He's not the "typical" sex offender, so although he made a grievous error, he should have say 5 years suspended. I don't think he should go on a sex offender list. And I think he's probably learned his lesson.
I'm not sure how much a man in his eighties could do though. So, probation, and a hefty fine, and something to each of the victims.
The teacher: well, although the girl was underage, I really think that the girl has to take some responsibility. At that age they have "some" idea of what they are doing. (I know I did at that age). He's not the "typical" sex offender, so although he made a grievous error, he should have say 5 years suspended. I don't think he should go on a sex offender list. And I think he's probably learned his lesson.
anglolawyer
Banned
It's a POV. If I had one I would be pretty freaked to find a thirty year old had made off (and made out) with my daughter, especially a teacher. But maybe that's not a wholly detached reaction. Still, I can see good reason why older people should be deterred from exploiting the young and 15 is still pretty young.
Totalcolour
New Blood
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2012
- Messages
- 8
Yes, it is young, and he is much older and he should have known better.
Here in the States though, there is something (not sure what it's called) about sharing of guilt. I was only mentioning it because a 15 year old should have "Some" idea of right and wrong, and most certainly should know what the sex laws are (And I'm not sure if the sharing of guilt issue would apply to this sort of case anyway).
Think of it another way though - suppose the two of them had committed murder. Would she be exonerated because she is underage? I don't think so. They would both take a portion of blame.
linusrichard
Master Poster
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2007
- Messages
- 2,710
If "respectable" means no criminal record, then I think a stiff fine, full restitution, and a year or two probation seems all right. Maybe 30 days of jail on the perversion charge. Or I guess I should say "gaol"?
Are you asking what I think he should get or what I think he did get? Seems to me like he should get something like 10 years on each, served concurrently. Doesn't matter much, he'd die in prison I suppose. I'm not saying he deserves a life sentence, but if a fair sentence is transformed into a life sentence by his age, it doesn't bother me at all. He could have avoided that by reporting his crimes earlier!
What I think he did get is a difficult question because I don't know UK law on concurrent vs. consecutive sentencing. I tend to assume that most western countries have more lenient sentencing than the US. So I could see him being sentenced to something like 3 years on each count. If the UK does concurrent sentencing, then that's 3 years in prison (which is pretty lenient by my standards and by US standards), but if they do consecutive sentencing, now he's doing 42 years, which is fairly draconian even by US standards.
What does "An allegation of rape ordered to lie on the file" mean? I take it to mean either that there was a rape charge that was dismissed in exchange for his guilty pleas in the sexual assault charges, or that there was a rape charge that was dismissed for lack of evidence. (If this has been answered already, please ignore; I'm obviously typing this before reading the thread.)
So there's four questions here - conviction or acquittal on each charge, and sentence as to each charge. Or--eight questions, I guess, because there's what I think should happen, and what I think will happen.
As far as conviction vs. acquittal, I have no opinion on what should happen. That's up to the trier of fact, judge or jury (I should know whether the UK has juries in criminal trials, but ... I don't!). I have some sympathy with his defense on the abduction charge, but it's the judge or jury's job to decide if it's true. I also don't have much opinion on whether he will be convicted, at least on the abduction charge. The sex charge seems pretty easy.
If he's convicted, I would think 15 years seems harsh but fair on the abduction charge, and 15 on the sex charge, concurrently. Mitigated by the victim's story, aggravated by the fact he took her out of the country.
Again, though, my prediction would be much lower. I would think 5 years on each, and again, I don't know if those would be concurrent or consecutive.
Okay, now I get to read the thread.
LashL
Goddess of Legaltainment™
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2006
- Messages
- 36,711
It looks like I was off by 6 months on Case A. I'll look forward to seeing how far off I am on Case C.
Last edited:
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
So if I were to purchase a car that happened to be the same make and model as the getaway car in a recent robbery, and a cop mistook it for the same car and wasted an afternoon questioning me, I'd be prosecuted for perverting the course of justice?
You have left no room for police error. Anybody doing anything --or merely existing!--could "slow down or sidetrack a police investigation". By your definition above, being the victim of a crime would be perverting the course of justice because the investigation of a previous crime gets delayed while the cops stop to take details of the new crime!
If you bought the car specifically for the purpose of providing a credible alibi to the true culprit, then yes, you should be prosecuted.
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
But that's not how fuelair's law was worded. "Any action that could conceivably slow down or sidetrack a police investigation as perverting the course of justice". If the clerk at the doughnut shop takes too long to box the order---wham. Perversion of justice. In fact, even if the clerk didn't cause a delay in the case, he might conceivably have delayed it, therefore: perversion of justice.
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
Which also happens to be the current definition of perversion of justice. There is nothing to be added to what we already have.
The argument is whether "someone put something on YouTube which could be misinterpreted" can be considered an attempt to pervert the course of justice. I would say not, because I've never mistaken YouTube (or the internet) for something that's supposed to be reliable testimony. You might as well charge someone with perverting justice if they doodled a stick-figure cartoon that showed OJ doing their crime. "Your Honor! Clearly the accused is trying to shift the blame!"