Force them into court for sentencing.

Vixen said:
You don't know in advance they'll be disruptive. In the Letby case, when the first couple of verdicts came in on 8 August 2023, she burst into tears. This is what the victims' families want to see.*
Click to expand...

The victims' families are not entitled to such a show.

The due process of law is not to psychologically torment the accused for the visceral satisfaction of the accuser. For me, your proposal is in the same category of criminal "justice" as celebrating prison rape as something an inmate deserves for their crimes: That is, your proposal is evil.
 
theprestige said:
The victims' families are not entitled to such a show.

The due process of law is not to psychologically torment the accused for the visceral satisfaction of the accuser. For me, your proposal is in the same category of criminal "justice" as celebrating prison rape as something an inmate deserves for their crimes: That is, your proposal is evil.
Click to expand...

It is not me that wants them dragged into court for sentencing. The heartbroken mother of nine-year-old Olivia Pratt-Korbel wanted to tell the man who recklessly and thuggishly shot her daughter dead (a 'wrong' person killing) wanted to tell the gangland convict the impact of his wanton behaviour. Thomas Cashman cowered in his cell rather than face the judge for sentencing. He, too, pleaded not guilty, forcing the family of his victim to sit through the agonising details of his depraved criminality.

But lo and behold it turns out Olivia's Mum is the 'evil' one by your reckoning.

Telling a criminal the impact of their crime does not equate to baying for their rape in prison.
 
Vixen said:
It is not me that wants them dragged into court for sentencing. The heartbroken mother of nine-year-old Olivia Pratt-Korbel wanted to tell the man who recklessly and thuggishly shot her daughter dead (a 'wrong' person killing) wanted to tell the gangland convict the impact of his wanton behaviour. Thomas Cashman cowered in his cell rather than face the judge for sentencing. He, too, pleaded not guilty, forcing the family of his victim to sit through the agonising details of his depraved criminality.

But lo and behold it turns out Olivia's Mum is the 'evil' one by your reckoning.

Telling a criminal the impact of their crime does not equate to baying for their rape in prison.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying she's evil for wanting that. I'm saying it would be evil to arrange our justice system to grant that kind of entitlement. The same category of evil, though to a (much) lesser degree, as celebrating prison rape as just deserts.

I do not want our justice system to be a venue where the perpetrator is made to suffer at the hands of the victim.
 
Vixen said:
It is not me that wants them dragged into court for sentencing. The heartbroken mother of nine-year-old Olivia Pratt-Korbel wanted to tell the man who recklessly and thuggishly shot her daughter dead (a 'wrong' person killing) wanted to tell the gangland convict the impact of his wanton behaviour. Thomas Cashman cowered in his cell rather than face the judge for sentencing. He, too, pleaded not guilty, forcing the family of his victim to sit through the agonising details of his depraved criminality.

But lo and behold it turns out Olivia's Mum is the 'evil' one by your reckoning.

Telling a criminal the impact of their crime does not equate to baying for their rape in prison.
Click to expand...

Behave

Are defendants forced in to the dock in Finland to hear sentence?
 
Last edited:
theprestige said:
I'm not saying she's evil for wanting that. I'm saying it would be evil to arrange our justice system to grant that kind of entitlement. The same category of evil, though to a (much) lesser degree, as celebrating prison rape as just deserts.

I do not want our justice system to be a venue where the perpetrator is made to suffer at the hands of the victim.
Click to expand...

If Mr. Big Man Cashman can strut around with a gun and terrorize the neighbourhood, I am sure he can face a broken middle-aged mother grieving for her beloved daughter.
 
Vixen said:
If Mr. Big Man Cashman can strut around with a gun and terrorize the neighbourhood, I am sure he can face a broken middle-aged mother grieving for her beloved daughter.
Click to expand...

Presumably people can endure lots of things that it would nevertheless be evil of us to impose on them.

Again, it's not a question of whether the perpetrator can face being made to suffer at the hands of his victims. It's a question of whether we want our justice system to be organized along such lines. I don't want that. I hope you don't either.
 
theprestige said:
Are defendants forced into the dock in Finland to hear sentence?
Click to expand...

There isn't a dock and yes, they are expected to be there in court.

Convicted defendants in Finland have to pay compensation out of their own pockets to their victims. Usually a modest sum but it can be substantial in a murder, hits them where it hurts; affects monies to their heirs. I am guessing you consider this also cruel, making the perpetrator literally put their hand in their pocket and pay their victim, as well as paying court costs. So traumatizing for them to be forced to acknowledge there is a direct victim of their crime.
 
theprestige said:
Presumably people can endure lots of things that it would nevertheless be evil of us to impose on them.

Again, it's not a question of whether the perpetrator can face being made to suffer at the hands of his victims. It's a question of whether we want our justice system to be organized along such lines. I don't want that. I hope you don't either.
Click to expand...

I am afraid it is already here. It is called Victim Impact Statements and these are already a part of the judicial process. It is a mockery that a convict can skulk in their cell and refuse to be present during this stage.

A victim impact statement is a written or oral statement made as part of the judicial legal process, which allows crime victims the opportunity to speak during the sentencing of the convicted person or at subsequent parole hearings.

Overview
One purpose of the statement is to allow the person or persons most directly affected by the crime to address the court during the decision making process. It is seen to personalize the crime and elevate the status of the victim. From the victim's point of view it is regarded as valuable in aiding their emotional recovery from their ordeal. It has also been suggested they may confront an offender with the results of their crime and thus aid rehabilitation.

Another purpose of the statement is to inform a court of the harm suffered by the victim if the court is required to, or has the option of, having regard to the harm suffered by the victim in deciding the sentence.
Click to expand...
wiki
 
Vixen said:
We have a totally different Criminal Justice system here based on the Germanic Napoleonic one (Roman Law). Anglo Saxon law is what we are speaking of here.
Click to expand...

That didn't answer the question.

Are defendants forced to be in the dock for sentence?
 
Vixen said:
There isn't a dock and yes, they are expected to be there in court.

Convicted defendants in Finland have to pay compensation out of their own pockets to their victims. Usually a modest sum but it can be substantial in a murder, hits them where it hurts; affects monies to their heirs. I am guessing you consider this also cruel, making the perpetrator literally put their hand in their pocket and pay their victim, as well as paying court costs. So traumatizing for them to be forced to acknowledge there is a direct victim of their crime.
Click to expand...

Are they forced to be in the dock?
 
Vixen said:
I am afraid it is already here. It is called Victim Impact Statements and these are already a part of the judicial process. It is a mockery that a convict can skulk in their cell and refuse to be present during this stage.

wiki
Click to expand...

That's not the same thing. I'd say "and you know it" but I'm not sure that's true.
 
Vixen said:
It depends on the grade of crime. Minor crimes can be processed through the post if there is no dispute about the facts.
Click to expand...

Given the question you're answering this would translate as a 'Yes, for certain crimes'. Can you enlarge?
 
MarkCorrigan said:
That's not the same thing. I'd say "and you know it" but I'm not sure that's true.
Click to expand...

Not sure what it is you are disputing. Victim Statements are part of the sentencing process, if relevant. The presence of the defendant during this stage is soon to become mandatory as per a Bill being passed through Parliament, and as confirmed by the Prime Minister.

I cannot see what the objection is.
 
Vixen said:
Not sure what it is you are disputing. Victim Statements are part of the sentencing process, if relevant. The presence of the defendant during this stage is soon to become mandatory as per a Bill being passed through Parliament, and as confirmed by the Prime Minister.

I cannot see what the objection is.
Click to expand...
So, again, are the convicted gong to be dragged into court if they feel they would prefer not to be there but stay in their cell?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom