I read in the paper that a paedophile got 3 MONTHS PROBATION for indecently assaulting 3 girls aged between 12 and 13 then a 19 year old got 8 months in prsion for shoplifting!!!!
Where is the logic in that???
2006-10-23 01:31:07 · 23 answers · asked by Sarah M 1 in News & Events ➔ Current Events
You're right there IS no logic there. Especially when you consider those poor girls will deal with what happened to them for the rest of their lives...
Shoplifting is no little smack-on-the-hand offense... but when a crime is committed against another human being (rape, assault, molestation, etc...) the punishment should be way more than probation. That's just insulting to the victims!
2006-10-23 01:39:38 · answer #1 · answered by MissJ 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yeah that paedo was the same one who is now being allowed to workout in a school gymnasium!!!!!
When my BF was a kid a paedophile attacked several little girls on their street (including their next door neighbours daughter who was 11. My BF and his little brother saw the attack and had to give evidence)
The guy got a really stupid sentence and was basically let out after about 18 months.
He then went and got a job.
In TOYS R US!
Seriously.
He obviously lied about his cirminal record when applying for the job and the shop didn't bother checking.
Once the locals found out they told the shop and the police and he was sacked.
But it shows how much value the police/courts/prison system and businesses put on the safety of kids doesn't it - a stupid short sentence and being given a job in a shop full of kids with no checks done on his background.
It seems you get more time in prison for not being able to pay your council tax or TV licence than for raping a child.
The paedo who attacked and stabbed my BF's mum when she was nine (and killed a five year old girl a few weeks later) went free for 34 years before he was "caught".
2006-10-23 16:48:57 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Don't believe everything you read in the papers - there is no evidence of this happening. Petty criminals - like shoplifters - rarely get punished at all. The person in question probably had a much gloomier past than the newspaper suggested.
It is also extrememly difficult to get proof and therefore convictions in child abuse cases. Where evidence is available and sex offenders are caught, sentencing is draconian by comparison to sanctions against criminals in general.
2006-10-23 08:49:14 · answer #3 · answered by lickintonight 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I study Criminology and it is amazing what I learnt in the past 2 years. Women and children being abused and raped is not important, these criminals usually get far less than they are supposed to. When criminals steal money, that is far more important. This is because the judges are male and out of tune with society. They don't consider women being raped as serious because they usually blame the woman, she is put on trial and children is far worse off because they are completely helpless. Fred and Rose West' daughters were constantly raped, the police knew about it and ignored it.
The Great Train Robbers stole £5 notes in millions and got life. These £5 notes were on the way to an incerator and then people who abused 100s of children like Sydney Cooke roamed free for years even after police found out about him.
2006-10-23 14:27:43 · answer #4 · answered by The Face 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There is absolutely no logic in that situation at all!!!
I believe the fact fact is that even though a paedophile is what they are and do what they do. They try to get the law/courts to believe that they are mentally stable. and when they go on to probation they try to prove the courts that they have changed mentally and emotionally.
I believe that a life sentence should mean life
2006-10-23 08:38:41 · answer #5 · answered by gemsi44 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Ever thought of the old saying birds of a feather stick together. The old school tie, freemasonry and the likes of.
2006-10-23 09:11:29 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Take it you are talking of England, if not the UK?
Because property has more value than life. If you look at sentencing in general, so it seems to me.
2006-10-23 08:37:21 · answer #7 · answered by Part Time Cynic 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I know how ya feel my ex uncle recieved nine months for processing thousands of pictures of children and assaulting a young girl and only got NINE months for it it makes ya sick.
2006-10-23 10:01:53 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Simple: The Labour government in association with the European Union and managed by Liberals!
(It could be closer to the truth than you think!)
2006-10-23 08:33:53 · answer #9 · answered by Wattsie 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
coz theres a screw loose in the scales of justice and as stupid and unfar as it sounds probation is good most of them dont get as far as court believe me atleast with probation they remain on the list
2006-10-23 08:35:41 · answer #10 · answered by nendlin 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋