Zamo Posted October 28, 2003 Author Share Posted October 28, 2003 Originally posted by nommedenet Last story in DB's post...intent to kill or cause or harm? http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2838&highlight=emergency+room Nomme Nomme, you miss the point (no pun intended). The person ADMITTED stabbing him in the head with "intent", presumably to cause harm but not kill. There was no argument that this was a deliberate and violent act. I personally think there is at least a question that this should have been classed as attempted murder and therefore it should have gone to trial. If a jury, after weighing up all the evidence, decided that it was not then that is another matter. Silda, you may be happy to entrust justice to the elite who negotiate deals behind closed doors but I am not. The risk is that decisions will be taken based on things like workloads or what is best for someones career or because someone has been bribed or threatened. Surely you are not so niave as to think such things don't go on are you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zamo Posted October 28, 2003 Author Share Posted October 28, 2003 Originally posted by Phanerothyme Absolutely. But there are thousands of speculative reasons why the charge of attempted murder wasn't made. It could be there was some evidence to show that the victim fell on the blade - proving or disproving this would be difficult. It could be the defendant was prepared to plead insanity. It could be the defendant believed the blade to be made of rubber. Any number of reasons. Let me say it again... the accused admitted stabbing him in the head with "intent". Couple this with the picture (if you saw it) and you would find it hard to imagine that he was doing anything other than trying to kill him. On this evidence alone I say it is reasonable to ask the CPS to justify a decision not to press for attempted murder and why the judge felt only 2 years was an appropriate punishment. If there are circumstances not reported thus far then fine - these will vindicate their decisions. If anyone would prefer to live in a country where people are unable to question the decisions of the establishment then may I suggest North Korea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nomme Posted October 28, 2003 Share Posted October 28, 2003 Article with piccies on the beeb web site: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/wear/3218163.stm Nomme Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lickszz Posted October 28, 2003 Share Posted October 28, 2003 Originally posted by max I'm quite happy with the judiciary we've got. To paraphrase what Hal said in another thread "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" Those words fit the bill in some instances. I have some other words. "No crime without a victim". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cycleracer Posted October 28, 2003 Share Posted October 28, 2003 He should have got two years for carrying the weapon without using the damn thing if you ask me. It does not matter why he stabbed him in the head, he was carrying an offensive weapon so that means he was intending to use it at some time wether it was on the person he used it on or anyone else. The facts of why this happened are not important, he is guilty of attempted murder and has got away with it. Regarding the British justice system well, thats another story and i think thats beyond repair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sidla Posted October 28, 2003 Share Posted October 28, 2003 Originally posted by Zamo Silda, you may be happy to entrust justice to the elite who negotiate deals behind closed doors but I am not. The risk is that decisions will be taken based on things like workloads or what is best for someones career or because someone has been bribed or threatened. Surely you are not so niave as to think such things don't go on are you? Give me evidence to suggest such things do go on and ask me that question again. And even if these things do happen, I'm feel certain that they only affect a small minority of cases. I'm fairly confident that 9 times out of 10 judges make the correct decisions. I don't see how being so cynical about things will help matters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zamo Posted October 29, 2003 Author Share Posted October 29, 2003 Originally posted by Sidla Give me evidence to suggest such things do go on and ask me that question again. And even if these things do happen, I'm feel certain that they only affect a small minority of cases. I'm fairly confident that 9 times out of 10 judges make the correct decisions. I don't see how being so cynical about things will help matters. Perhaps they do get it right 9 times out of 10 but surely we don't simply say "that'll do". What about that 10th person, be it an innocent person wrongly convicted or a victim of crime who doesn't get justice because of plea bargaining or weak sentencing? I think that we not only have a right to speak out and demand answers when we think something is wrong, we also have a duty. You will be greatful if one day you end up that unfortunate "acceptable" 10th person. Proof of miscarriages... "Lord Chancellor's Department's statistics on successful appeals against criminal conviction show that in the decade 1989-1999 the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) abated over 8,470 criminal convictions - a yearly average of 770. In addition, there are around 3,500 quashed criminal convictions a year at the Crown Court for convictions obtained at the magistrates' courts. Contrary to popular perceptions, then, wrongful criminal convictions are a normal, everyday feature of the criminal justice system - the system doesn't just sometimes get it wrong, it gets it wrong everyday, of every week, of every month of every year. With the result that thousands of innocent people experience a whole variety of harmful consequences that wrongful criminal convictions engender." source I hade a quick search for some figures on plea bargaining. I found this paper, which quotes a survey that found 18.2% of people pleading guilty, did so after a formal plea bargains. A further 13.2% pleaded guilty after agreeing a "tacit" bargain. So, nearly a third of all guilt plea cases are as a result of some sort of bargain, whether formally offered or not. Now I'm not saying that there are no circumstances in which a plea bargain is appropriate. I'm saying that this is a dangerous trend. All I have suggested in this thread is that, at the very least, those making these "bargains" (prosecution and defence lawers and judges) should be made to justify their decisions when there are reasonable concerns that justice has not been served. Silda, do you still think it is wrong to expect this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phanerothyme Posted October 29, 2003 Share Posted October 29, 2003 Originally posted by nommedenet Article with piccies on the beeb web site: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/wear/3218163.stm Nomme No mention of a plea bargain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phanerothyme Posted October 29, 2003 Share Posted October 29, 2003 Originally posted by Zamo Let me say it again... the accused admitted stabbing him in the head with "intent". Couple this with the picture (if you saw it) and you would find it hard to imagine that he was doing anything other than trying to kill him. On this evidence alone I say it is reasonable to ask the CPS to justify a decision not to press for attempted murder and why the judge felt only 2 years was an appropriate punishment. If there are circumstances not reported thus far then fine - these will vindicate their decisions. If anyone would prefer to live in a country where people are unable to question the decisions of the establishment then may I suggest North Korea. If you want to question the establishment then please do so, and report your findings about this cae back here so we can all see what the actual cirumstances of the case were. The victim can appeal against the sentence, the victim can force judicial review, the victim can take out a private prosecution. It doesn't end with the conviction, so much as begin with it. If you feel this is not an appropriate sentence, write to the CPS, the Judge that tried it, your MP. You have the power to effect change as much as anyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zamo Posted October 29, 2003 Author Share Posted October 29, 2003 Originally posted by Phanerothyme No mention of a plea bargain. "The 18-year-old knifeman has been sentenced to two years in a Young Offender Institution at Newcastle Crown Court after he pleaded guilty to wounding with intent. He denied attempted murder and the prosecution accepted his guilty plea to the lesser charge." source I agree that plea bargains are in some circumstance appropriate. For example in big fraud cases where evidence goes on for months and months, costs millions of pounds and is extremely complex and difficult for juries to follow and understand. However, this case is far more straight-forward and a jury should have been given the opportunity to decide if it was attempted murder, wounding with intent or self defence. If a jury had found him guilty of attempted murder then I believe he would have received a far longer, and more appropriate, sentence. The sentence seems even more inappropriate given the fact that perpetrator was also given a community rehabilitation order for robbery only last September. How many chances do you give people? Where's the deterrent? Where's the justice? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.