Chris Huhne's ex-wife found guilty

Eight months each. Should have been 12 IMO, but it'll do. Hopefully others will think twice in future, given the high profile nature of this case.
 
I feel it is a waste of public funds putting them up and feeding them for even a few months. They are no risk to society so without being lenient a suspended sentence seems better or hours of community service.

A driving ban might be fair for Mr H say 12 months a re-test.
 
onomatopoeia said:
Eight months each. Should have been 12 IMO, but it'll do. Hopefully others will think twice in future, given the high profile nature of this case.
Click to expand...

Ouch, pretty serious - definitely a sentence to deter others from such folly.
 
DrRusty said:
I feel it is a waste of public funds putting them up and feeding them for even a few months. They are no risk to society so without being lenient a suspended sentence seems better or hours of community service.

A driving ban might be fair for Mr H say 12 months a re-test.
Click to expand...

Agreed total waste of public funds.
 
Eight months each (beaten to it)...
 
A woman pleaded guilty for taking points for her 17 year old son got over two years last year. What a pathetic mockery of 'justice'.

Just wait for the inside story of Huhne's prison experience that has led to a reformed character which will undoubtedly feature in the Times.
 
At least CH can write a book on the whole saga ....no point in VP doing one as she has told us the story already.
 
TriggerHappy said:
Just wait for the inside story of Huhne's prison experience that has led to a reformed character which will undoubtedly feature in the Times.
Click to expand...

Noticed they've been wheeling out Aitkin for 'prison experience' interviews :shrug:
 
Perverting the course of justice is a very serious offence. Both should have got longer IMO.
 
Home curfew after about 9 weeks.

Got off lightly IMO.


Heather
 
Jez2011 said:
Perverting the course of justice is a very serious offence. Both should have got longer IMO.
Click to expand...

Very true. Should have been nearer to 8 years for each of them, and then deportation for her.
 
DrRusty said:
I feel it is a waste of public funds putting them up and feeding them for even a few months. They are no risk to society so without being lenient a suspended sentence seems better or hours of community service.

A driving ban might be fair for Mr H say 12 months a re-test.
Click to expand...

Agree. Many others are a much bigger risk to society yet get far less punishment.
 
Should make them serve their sentences in the same cell.
 
DrRusty said:
I feel it is a waste of public funds putting them up and feeding them for even a few months. They are no risk to society so without being lenient a suspended sentence seems better or hours of community service.

A driving ban might be fair for Mr H say 12 months a re-test.
Click to expand...

given that they have the means to pay we should charge them for their room and board during their sentence ;)
 
Actually, I think that's something that should be considered for everyone sent to prison.

Edit: Paying their way, not murder.

Cross posted with Tom.
 
Last edited:
simon ess said:
Actually, I think that's something that should be considered for everyone sent to prison.
Click to expand...

yep , if they've got the means to pay , they pay (afterall; they'd be paying rent/mortgage on the outside)

if they don't or don't want to then they do meaningful work inside to pay their board and lodgings in kind.

Unfortunately i think the EU court of fluffy bunny cuddles ruled that this was against their basic human rights.

That aside i do agree that the two oxygen theives concerned (and indeed many other non violent offenders) would have been equally punished by being made to do 8 months equivalent comunity service picking up dog crap, shovelling slime out of ditches , or cleaning grafiti off walls with a nail brush - while wearing a pink boiler suit with " I'm a lying scumbag" printed on the back
 
Last edited:
I'm a big supporter of human rights for all sorts of reasons, but I fail to see how paying their way in prison has any impact on their human rights.

Baffles me that one.
 
simon ess said:
I'm a big supporter of human rights for all sorts of reasons, but I fail to see how paying their way in prison has any impact on their human rights.

Baffles me that one.
Click to expand...

and me

it was a while ago , but from memory the basics were that by forcing them to rent accomodation/food etc without a choice of where to live what to rent etc , you were depriving them of a basic human right :cuckoo:

- that said as i say 8 months of picking up dog crap , while being made to live in a crap as crap council house in a deprived area and only given £70/week each for food and bills (funded from their own bank accounts with further access blocked) would be a probably greater punishment.

or we could give them the option of a crash course in IED disposal and a short tour in Helmand. :lol:
 
Swansea East MP Geraint Davies came up with his own punishment.

He said: "It will cost the tax payer £50,000 to put Chris Huhne and Vickey Pryce in jail when they don't represent a threat to the public. Wouldn't it be better to charge them £50,000 each, as a fine, and that way the tax payer would get £100,00 at a time of economic hardship?"
 
Al1944 said:
Swansea East MP Geraint Davies came up with his own punishment.

He said: "It will cost the tax payer £50,000 to put Chris Huhne and Vickey Pryce in jail when they don't represent a threat to the public. Wouldn't it be better to charge them £50,000 each, as a fine, and that way the tax payer would get £100,00 at a time of economic hardship?"
Click to expand...

And the rest. Means test them then fine appropriately.
Call it £100,000 each and 240 hours community service.
 
Al1944 said:
Swansea East MP Geraint Davies came up with his own punishment.

He said: "It will cost the tax payer £50,000 to put Chris Huhne and Vickey Pryce in jail when they don't represent a threat to the public. Wouldn't it be better to charge them £50,000 each, as a fine, and that way the tax payer would get £100,00 at a time of economic hardship?"
Click to expand...

Good idea. I know some people think they could/should have got longer, BUT, how many here would do something similar for a loved one (or son/daughter). While many would say no, I think an equal number would say yes they would.
 
cambsno said:
Good idea. I know some people think they could/should have got longer, BUT, how many here would do something similar for a loved one (or son/daughter). While many would say no, I think an equal number would say yes they would.
Click to expand...

Agreed:thumbs:
 
Seeing as being a politician is (supposedly) a position of integrity, and Chris Huhne has admitted perverting the course of justice (i.e. lying), should he be made to repay everything he has earned and acquired though his position as MP, like they do with the proceeds of other crimes?
 
Last edited:
Al1944 said:
Swansea East MP Geraint Davies came up with his own punishment.

He said: "It will cost the tax payer £50,000 to put Chris Huhne and Vickey Pryce in jail when they don't represent a threat to the public. Wouldn't it be better to charge them £50,000 each, as a fine, and that way the tax payer would get £100,00 at a time of economic hardship?"
Click to expand...


So the logic is: rich person commits an offence that is normally imprisonable but can effectively buy their way out of jail by paying a fine as it would "help the tax payer" ?

Sod that. Rich people should get sent to prison just the same as those on low or average incomes, thank you very much.

I'm amazed at how trivial some people seem to think this offence is. A robust and effective criminal justice system is a fundamental of any kind of functioning civilised society and any of interference with it, even from smartly dressed people that have a lot of money and don't go round robbing grannies, deserves a lengthy spell inside.

I'll probably be accused of be a fascist now. Normally I'm accused of having a beard and wearing sandals as I'm one of the "human rights mob" ;)
 
onomatopoeia said:
So the logic is: rich person commits an offence that is normally imprisonable but can effectively buy their way out of jail by paying a fine as it would "help the tax payer" ?

Sod that. Rich people should get sent to prison just the same as those on low or average incomes, thank you very much.

I'm amazed at how trivial some people seem to think this offence is. A robust and effective criminal justice system is a fundamental of any kind of functioning civilised society and any of interference with it, even from smartly dressed people that have a lot of money and don't go round robbing grannies, deserves a lengthy spell inside.

I'll probably be accused of be a fascist now. Normally I'm accused of having a beard and wearing sandals as I'm one of the "human rights mob" ;)
Click to expand...

Effective, what about criminals who repeatedly offend but don't serve time? You must have seen some of the lowlife on those police programmes, they are a far bigger risk to society.

In my local paper the other week a bloke had a load of kiddie pics on his pc. A fine and a slap on the wrist. Well I for one think that someone who downloads kiddie porn is a far bigger risk than someone who does what they have done.
 
ZoneV said:
Seeing as being a politician is (supposedly) a position of integrity, and Chris Huhne has admitted perverting the course of justice (i.e. lying), should he be made to repay everything he has earned and acquired though his position as MP, like they do with the proceeds of other crimes?
Click to expand...

be a dangerous precedent to set - if we are going to fine every politician who lies there could be a lot of peniless politicos wandering about

" so tell me mr clegg , when did you first hear about the allegations of impromper conduct in your party"

"dear mr cameron, exactly how did you come to leave your daughter in the pub"

"so mr blair about this dossier of evidence of Iraqi WMD"

etc etc etc :lol:
 
Frankly it's more than I thought they'd get :shrug:
 
big soft moose said:
be a dangerous precedent to set - if we are going to fine every politician who lies there could be a lot of peniless politicos wandering about

" so tell me mr clegg , when did you first hear about the allegations of impromper conduct in your party"

"dear mr cameron, exactly how did you come to leave your daughter in the pub"

"so mr blair about this dossier of evidence of Iraqi WMD"

etc etc etc :lol:
Click to expand...

That's what I can't understand, a politician lied!! Happens all the time! Half of them committed fraud with expenses but only 1 or 2 went to jail.
 
Gr8Shot said:
And the rest. Means test them then fine appropriately.
Call it £100,000 each and 240 hours community service.
Click to expand...

I'd hazard a guess and say that no member of the public has ever received a maximum fine or anything like it

I know a guy that got caught drink driving twice, second time he was 3x the limit

He was bricking it when he went to court, came out bouncing , max was £10,000 fine and or 2 years in prison

He got a mandatory 3 yr ban and a £500 fine, not even a weeks wages, pathetic
 
Vicky Pryce and Chris Huhne have just been sentenced to 8 months each.

No word yet on where Pryce will serve those 16 months.
 
Monstro said:
Vicky Pryce and Chris Huhne have just been sentenced to 8 months each.

No word yet on where Pryce will serve those 16 months.
Click to expand...

Monstro sentenced to 100 lashes and 30 days in the stocks for telling bad jokes
 
Keith W said:
100 lashes and 30 days in the stocks
Click to expand...

You're all right monstro - Lynton will take that for you....















..... it will save him a month of paying 'Mike' good money for that kind of thing :exit:
 
All this because Pryce was a bitter old witch. Glad it backfired on her.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top