Jump to content

Teenager who sexually abused a child given absolute discharge


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Resident said:

But he hasn't got a conviction has he. No record - No conviction. 

And you know that how? Because the OP said so?

 

That's the problem with these dog whistle reactionary petitions. Everyone gets very excited and starts sharing it on their facebooks getting all worked up and annoyed in the process without thinking "Hang on a minute, is any of this this actually true?"

 

AN ABSOLUTE DISCHARGE IS A CRIMINAL CONVICTION AND THE OFFENDER WILL HAVE A CRIMINAL RECORD!

 

Even if a million people sign the petition, it will still not make it not a criminal conviction.  🙄

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Top Cats Hat said:

And you know that how? Because the OP said so?

 

That's the problem with these dog whistle reactionary petitions. Everyone gets very excited and starts sharing it on their facebooks getting all worked up and annoyed in the process without thinking "Hang on a minute, is any of this this actually true?"

 

AN ABSOLUTE DISCHARGE IS A CRIMINAL CONVICTION AND THE OFFENDER WILL HAVE A CRIMINAL RECORD!

 

Even if a million people sign the petition, it will still not make it not a criminal conviction.  🙄

 

 

On the sex offenders register ? it appears not because he wouldn't be able to be a dentist. The thing he should have had done is that, sod his job prospects. You have just contradicted yourself tch  is it a criminal record or not?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Top Cats Hat said:

And you know that how? Because the OP said so?

 

That's the problem with these dog whistle reactionary petitions. Everyone gets very excited and starts sharing it on their facebooks getting all worked up and annoyed in the process without thinking "Hang on a minute, is any of this this actually true?"

 

AN ABSOLUTE DISCHARGE IS A CRIMINAL CONVICTION AND THE OFFENDER WILL HAVE A CRIMINAL RECORD!

 

Even if a million people sign the petition, it will still not make it not a criminal conviction.  🙄

 

 

 

Quote

The ruling means that Daniel has been convicted of child abuse but will not have a criminal record and will not be put on the sex offenders register.

From...https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/naive-teenager-christopher-daniel-who-abused-girl-was-just-curious-mmhnjwc59

(You have to subscribe to read the full article, sorry)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Top Cats Hat said:

Maybe you could point out where I have contradicted myself? 😂

you have put an absolute discharge means he will have a record,followed by the petition won't make it a criminal offence. I hope this is reviewed and he gets his proper justice, not this mockery.

Edited by lottiecass
addition
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, lottiecass said:

you have put an absolute discharge means he will have a record,followed by the petition won't make it a criminal offence. I hope this is reviewed and he gets his proper justice, not this mockery.

What do you mean "proper justice"???   What mockery are you on about?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, lottiecass said:

you have put an absolute discharge means he will have a record,followed by the petition won't make it a criminal offence.

No, what I said is that an absolute discharge is a criminal conviction and no amount of signatures on a petition will make it not a criminal conviction.

 

I have just seen that the conviction was under Scottish law therefore the conviction is not recorded as it would be under UK law.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Top Cats Hat said:

No, what I said is that an absolute discharge is a criminal conviction and no amount of signatures on a petition will make it not a criminal conviction.

 

I have just seen that the conviction was under Scottish law therefore the conviction is not recorded as it would be under UK law.

 

 

Hopefully a review can alter that, and the judge wants sacking. Mitigation ,he  was naïve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, lottiecass said:

Hopefully a review can alter that, and the judge wants sacking. Mitigation ,he  was naïve.

What makes you such an expert on the matter?   How the hell do you know anything about the mitigation that was even pleaded. 

 

I never understand reactionaries like you (and the multiple others).     I know better.  What I say is right.   I can make a better Judgment.  Call that Justice..    blah blah blah. 

 

Its pathetic

 

Unless you were there in the court room observing every single piece of eveidence and hearing every single argument with the legal qualifications required to make an informed Judgment you have no basis to make such comments.

 

The only people with any sway in whether it should be challenged and appealed will be the lawyers and parties actually involved in the case.  Everyone else is just giving a load of hot air on whatever side of the story they choose to pick to suit their own agenda.   Guess what, trial by emotional reactionary social media storms is not justice.

 

 

Edited by ECCOnoob
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.