W.T.F is going on

[viv1969]

no "crimes of passion" in the UK

but they have charged him with GBH ……. is that just as a starters …….. so that they can get an easy conviction

he has handed himself in but he has pleaded "not guilty" .. according to reports …………. presumably he has just handed himself in "to help the police eliminate him from their enquiries"

"Crimes of passion" as you put it would fall under manslaughter in England and Wales.
Kevin Wilson has also been charged with Child Destruction; a charge which I hope the CPS vigorously pursue.

 

[BillN_33]

He has been refused bail ……….. shock horror

In will roll a host of Human Rights lawyers, the Court in Strasbourg, Brussels, the League of Prison Visitors, the left wing "pinkos" and of course Shami Chakrabarti, (just in case he was tortured by being handcuffed)

but he is "innocent until proven guilty"


Funny olde world

 

[viv1969]

He has been refused bail ……….. shock horror

In will roll a host of Human Rights lawyers, the Court in Strasbourg, Brussels, the League of Prison Visitors, the left wing "pinkos" and of course Shami Chakrabarti, (just in case he was tortured by being handcuffed)

but he is "innocent until proven guilty"


Funny olde world

I believe a conviction will be quite easy to secure.
It's the sentence that will be hugely disappointing.

The charges could be revised though, should the condition of the mother take a turn

 

[the black fox]

perhaps they should put him in a womans prison till trial ,as long as all the inmates know the crime ..i can see the headlines now the eunoch faces trial at last

 

[Llamaman]

I believe a conviction will be quite easy to secure.

Will it? They'll have to prove the identity of the assailants beyond reasonable doubt - if they were careful to avoid CCTV without the helmets on and have disposed of their clothes it may be difficult to prove.

 

[BillN_33]

he will get the best legal aid money can buy - the State are paying

 

[viv1969]

Will it? They'll have to prove the identity of the assailants beyond reasonable doubt - if they were careful to avoid CCTV without the helmets on and have disposed of their clothes it may be difficult to prove.

Victim testimony alone is often enough.

 

[Llamaman]

Victim testimony alone is often enough.

Good point, but if they didn't speak, how reliable would you consider an identification based purely upon height, build? I'm not convinced that if I were on that jury I could convict on that basis,

Hopefully the assailants have slipped up somewhere and a concrete ID is possible.

 

[BillN_33]

The legal boys like to spin the trial out as long as possible, he will wear a nice dark suit, white shirt and lightish blue tie, his primary school teacher will act as a witness saying what a marvellous child he was, plus numerous other positive character witness ………….. he will then blame the State for reducing his benefits saying that this has caused him to go out to work when he could have sat at home watching Sky TV………. and he needs more money to feed his drug habit as since they stopped smoking in public places he needs to go around "stoned" all the time as that is the only way he can cope without a fag.

and then of course it will be a case of mistaken identity, he will plead insanity, not remembering anything ……. supported by a couple of highly paid "expert witness" …….. his QC will say that he is a lovely man, has never done anything like this before and the only crime he has ever committed was to mistakenly microwave his sisters pet rabbit ………. the QC will then say Ford open prison is the place for him as he is studying for his GCSE french and would like to go on to do an MA and one day become a Headmaster of an infants school.

Shami Chakrabarti will be in Court to make sure he has a comfortable cushion to sit on

The Judge will wake up and agree and rush home to watch the end of the latest ODI

If found guilty 5 years would be my guess …….. be he has yet to be found guilty

if found guilty he will appeal to the European Court of Human Rights and be acquitted on a technically as some policeman forgot to stamp a form in the right box

am I cynical?

Funny Olde world

 

[dejongj]

Because I find the act of two men kicking and stamping a heavily pregnant woman in the midsection to be an utterly vile act, an act that has no regard for the human life growing within the victim. I suppose it could be passed off as cost effective abortion by some, to others, it is a pretty despicable act.

Whilst I don't disagree it is a vile act we must keep it in perspective, the ex-boyfriend has been arrested, the other person is still on the run. This was done on purpose and specifically targeted for the pregnancy (ok not proven yet but it is becoming rather obvious). This is not some random attack or civilisation going away, it was done specifically and on purpose.

Children are still safe to play in the street, and people can still walk about...If this was something totally random say targeting women with the tfl badge pinned on I can understand it, everything is pointing into the direction of a very specific act.

 

[SFTPhotography]

Whilst I don't disagree it is a vile act we must keep it in perspective, the ex-boyfriend has been arrested, the other person is still on the run. This was done on purpose and specifically targeted for the pregnancy (ok not proven yet but it is becoming rather obvious). This is not some random attack or civilisation going away, it was done specifically and on purpose.

Children are still safe to play in the street, and people can still walk about...If this was something totally random say targeting women with the tfl badge pinned on I can understand it, everything is pointing into the direction of a very specific act.

Yes. Any person who plans to do this for revenge/one up/punishment needs shot in the face.

 

[simon ess]

Yes. Any person who plans to do this for revenge/one up/punishment needs shot in the face.

Would that be for revenge or punishment?

 

[SFTPhotography]

Would that be for revenge or punishment?

Justice. Someone who does that to an unborn child does not deserve to live.

 

[simon ess]

Oh yes, I'm very clear that you favour capital punishment. I don't, but I understand that many do and that's fine.

It's the shooting in the face bit I'm curious about.

 

[BRASH]

I've actually seen somebody who was shot in the face. Very interesting, if a bit messy.

 

[viv1969]

The legal boys like to spin the trial out as long as possible, he will wear a nice dark suit, white shirt and lightish blue tie, his primary school teacher will act as a witness saying what a marvellous child he was, plus numerous other positive character witness ………….. he will then blame the State for reducing his benefits saying that this has caused him to go out to work when he could have sat at home watching Sky TV………. and he needs more money to feed his drug habit as since they stopped smoking in public places he needs to go around "stoned" all the time as that is the only way he can cope without a fag.

and then of course it will be a case of mistaken identity, he will plead insanity, not remembering anything ……. supported by a couple of highly paid "expert witness" …….. his QC will say that he is a lovely man, has never done anything like this before and the only crime he has ever committed was to mistakenly microwave his sisters pet rabbit ………. the QC will then say Ford open prison is the place for him as he is studying for his GCSE french and would like to go on to do an MA and one day become a Headmaster of an infants school.

Shami Chakrabarti will be in Court to make sure he has a comfortable cushion to sit on

The Judge will wake up and agree and rush home to watch the end of the latest ODI

If found guilty 5 years would be my guess …….. be he has yet to be found guilty

if found guilty he will appeal to the European Court of Human Rights and be acquitted on a technically as some policeman forgot to stamp a form in the right box

am I cynical?

Funny Olde world

That's quite the story when the facts aren't known to you, nor apparently the way publicly provided defense works here.
It's not a John Grisham novel.

 

[big soft moose]

It's the shooting in the face bit I'm curious about.

Personally i'd have thought behind the ear would be more effective - through the face is more likely to be non fatal due to the ammount of stuff, teeth, maxillary sinus etc between the shooter and the brain.

That said i'm with steve on the principal if not the exact method

 

[viv1969]

Good point, but if they didn't speak, how reliable would you consider an identification based purely upon height, build? I'm not convinced that if I were on that jury I could convict on that basis,

Hopefully the assailants have slipped up somewhere and a concrete ID is possible.

Possibly difficult.
But we don't know if they spoke or not.
We don't know if they were dumb enough to raise the visors / faces on the helmets.
Given that they "appear" at first glance to simply be two viscous south London scrotes, I can't imagine them being smart enough to have carried out such a violent and personally motivated attack without maybe bragging to the victim, or to each other, about how she desrved it and how brave and fearsome they were.

 

[Chipper]

Yes this is sickening and I do dispair at what this country is coming to.
However where is the evidence that bringing back the death penalty will stop this type of crime?

There is none. Evidence world wide makes it clear that this is not a deterrent. It is state sanctioned revenge.. Even some American States are banning the death penalty. To say that murdering is wrong so the state is going to murder you is nonsense.

 

[big soft moose]

There is none. Evidence world wide makes it clear that this is not a deterrent. .

rubbish - it is the only 100% effective detterent to reoffending, because if you are dead you can't do it again

its not about revenge its about protecting society from the perpetrator rather than putting the criminals rights ahead of the innocent

 

[BillN_33]

It is also quite "cost effective" - we are in a period of "austerity"

 

[BRASH]

There is none. Evidence world wide makes it clear that this is not a deterrent. It is state sanctioned revenge.. Even some American States are banning the death penalty. To say that murdering is wrong so the state is going to murder you is nonsense.

Murder is an illegal act. Where places have the death penalty as a legal punishment, then by definition it cannot be murder.

 

[BillN_33]

I still think building prisons in the CAR, (Central African republic) and sub-contracting the service to the nastier parts of Africa is a move in the right direction. Cost effective, helps with local employment are just a couple of the side benefits

 

[big soft moose]

Possibly difficult.
But we don't know if they spoke or not.
We don't know if they were dumb enough to raise the visors / faces on the helmets.
Given that they "appear" at first glance to simply be two viscous south London scrotes, I can't imagine them being smart enough to have carried out such a violent and personally motivated attack without maybe bragging to the victim, or to each other, about how she desrved it and how brave and fearsome they were.

that - plus of course foresensic, fibres etc might well place them at the scene - i'd imagine its pretty hard to kick someone that many times without getting either traces of their clothing, blood etc on your shoes, or traces of your shoes on them

 

[fracster]

Whilst I don't disagree it is a vile act we must keep it in perspective, the ex-boyfriend has been arrested, the other person is still on the run. This was done on purpose and specifically targeted for the pregnancy (ok not proven yet but it is becoming rather obvious). This is not some random attack or civilisation going away, it was done specifically and on purpose.

Children are still safe to play in the street, and people can still walk about...If this was something totally random say targeting women with the tfl badge pinned on I can understand it, everything is pointing into the direction of a very specific act.

I really fail to see how it matters one jot if the act was targeted or random,neither makes the crime any less despicable bud.

 

[Chipper]

rubbish - it is the only 100% effective detterent to reoffending, because if you are dead you can't do it again

its not about revenge its about protecting society from the perpetrator rather than putting the criminals rights ahead of the innocent

The death penalty does not deter people from committing murder in the first place. There are also well documented cases of dead cert convictions which turned out to be wrong and had we had the death penalty then the state would have executed innocent people. I do agree that life should mean life. Being locked in a cell for 23 hours a day is a worse punishment that lasts years. Be interesting to see how this repulsive crime is treated in the courts.

 

[SFTPhotography]

It's the shooting in the face bit I'm curious about.

It's cheap, it means the person dies and it means if they wanted an open casket funeral they couldn't as their face would be mangled.

 

[SFTPhotography]

rubbish - it is the only 100% effective detterent to reoffending, because if you are dead you can't do it again

its not about revenge its about protecting society from the perpetrator rather than putting the criminals rights ahead of the innocent

I hate to agree but...

He's right. Shout it from the roof tops.

 

[BillN_33]

My mother is against Capital punishment

she always says

"hanging is to good for them"

 

[camerassassin]

I presume you meant

she always says " hanging is TOO good for them "

 

[Llamaman]

rubbish - it is the only 100% effective detterent to reoffending, because if you are dead you can't do it again

its not about revenge its about protecting society from the perpetrator rather than putting the criminals rights ahead of the innocent

Life imprisonment achieves exactly the same, with the added benefit that when you convict the wrong man, there's the possibility of correcting it and giving the wrongly convicted some of their life back.

 

[viv1969]

I'd settle for life imprisonment to be honest.
But not in some travelodge prison with a gym, tv, or the opportunity to study for a degree etc.
Simply removing these sort of people from the streets is not, in my opinion, suitable punishment.

Spending their sentence inhabiting a 6'x6' cell, bar fronted rather than door and wall, with a bed, a loo, a basin, and little else works for me.

Oh I know that posts which follow will call that retribution....revenge. ..rather than punishment, and they're entitled to that opinion. But I'm willing to bet that opinion would change somewhat if they were to lose a family member or even a close friend to a violent unlawful end.

 

[dejongj]

rubbish - it is the only 100% effective detterent to reoffending, because if you are dead you can't do it again

I hate to break it to you, but that is rubbish and impossible. I leave it to you work out why

 

[camerassassin]

What worries me is the cost of keeping these folk inside. It's not cheap !!

 

[JennyGW]

now your just being plain insultuing I asked a question thats all.. to then insinuate that I am defending there actions is nothing short of disgusting

Then what is your motive?

My impression is that you called the OP a racist. Is that not insulting?

 

[JennyGW]

then why not tell us the womans colour or the policemans colour or any witness colour.. isnt that telling it how it is? just stating the bad peoples colour isnt telling it as it is...

As, after having her baby killed, the woman was lying on the floor, I am assuming a description didn't have to be put out to find her. That may seem a blunt way of putting it but, my god, what about the victim?!?

 

[JennyGW]

The law in this country is very weak. Criminals know that they can get away with so much these days. Bring back hard labour and slopping out etc. Real punishment!

i think bringing back corporal punishment in schools. I also feel that some time doing national service would help. I like the thought of one of these criminals going through boot camp.

 

[cambsno]

The death penalty does not deter people from committing murder in the first place. There are also well documented cases of dead cert convictions which turned out to be wrong and had we had the death penalty then the state would have executed innocent people. I do agree that life should mean life. Being locked in a cell for 23 hours a day is a worse punishment that lasts years. Be interesting to see how this repulsive crime is treated in the courts.

Yes it does! It won't stop all but it will deter some. As I see it, you have 3 factors in crime, motive, punishment and moral compass. They work together, i.e.:

You know theft is wrong and you don't agree, however you have no money and your child is crying through hunger (motive), you steal bread as you know your will get a slap on the wrist. However, if like most of us you are not skint, you would not steal at all, or, if you were skint but theft of a loaf resulted in a 10 year jail term you would probably not steal.

Same could be said for driving, most of us don't drink & drive as we could kill others (plus we would lose license, for many a job = lose house etc...). While some will still drink and drive if we reduced the punishment to say £10 fine we would see more cases. If it became a standard 15 year jail term it would get even lower. Many of us speed (choice or not paying attention) and will cope with 3 points and a £100 fine. But if doing 80mph say you get a 3 year jail term would you chance it?

So while not everyone will be deterred, the tougher the punishment the less likely to are to commit that crime.

 

[Phil V]

i think bringing back corporal punishment in schools. I also feel that some time doing national service would help. I like the thought of one of these criminals going through boot camp.

Whilst the idea that some young people would benefit from National Service has a certain charm, I can't see how it would help any of my kids.

And whilst I find the idea of every fake tanned, fake finger nailed 18 year old girl doing national service hilarious, I can't see it as a worthwhile investment for either the country or the military.


(Or do you think it'd be possible to just send boys in 2015?)

 

[Phil V]

Yes it does! It won't stop all but it will deter some. As I see it, you have 3 factors in crime, motive, punishment and moral compass. They work together, i.e.:

You know theft is wrong and you don't agree, however you have no money and your child is crying through hunger (motive), you steal bread as you know your will get a slap on the wrist. However, if like most of us you are not skint, you would not steal at all, or, if you were skint but theft of a loaf resulted in a 10 year jail term you would probably not steal.

Same could be said for driving, most of us don't drink & drive as we could kill others (plus we would lose license, for many a job = lose house etc...). While some will still drink and drive if we reduced the punishment to say £10 fine we would see more cases. If it became a standard 15 year jail term it would get even lower. Many of us speed (choice or not paying attention) and will cope with 3 points and a £100 fine. But if doing 80mph say you get a 3 year jail term would you chance it?

So while not everyone will be deterred, the tougher the punishment the less likely to are to commit that crime.

Well I'd guess you're not really an expert then.