Savage scum get light tap on the wrists

[mids]

I fcuking despair of this country, I really do. Why do we not punish these people properly? ie, in this case just kill them.

Three men who filmed themselves gang-raping a 16-year-old girl before dousing her in caustic soda were today sentenced to between six and nine years in jail.

The girl, who has learning difficulties and a mental age of nine, was lured into a disused flat being renovated in Tottenham, north London, and repeatedly raped over two hours. She had agreed to go there for sex with a man she knew because she thought it would make her popular, she told Wood Green crown court in north London.

www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/jan/20/gang-rape-caustic-soda-london

[VikingHumpingWitch]

Holy fücking Christ.

[minge tightly]

Horrific.

The sentences given are being reviewed though

[ricklinc]

Ha! I would imagine that 6, 8 and 9 years for rape is considered unacceptably harsh by the water-damaged bleaters. Even when the prison service divides the sentence by 2 for good behaviour and lets them serve half of that with an electronic tag.

Why is rape not considered a capital crime and punished accordingly? Human societies spent generations stamping out what many would consider the enactment of a natural impulse. Harsh penalties were the only way to keep incidences of rape down. Until it became abhorrent and men were expected to behave better than that. And we'd pretty much achieved it. Now, thanks to the enlightened progress of certain drippy members of society we have excuses and mitigations and rights leading to softer and softer punishment which can only lead to more rape.

Corny as it sounds, John Wayne would never have behaved like that. He'd have shot a rapist. He may have been pure fictional poor acting but as a role model he was worth a Hell of a lot.

[jimboky]

Were it my daughter I think I'd rather risk doing 5 years for murdering the scum then have them do 5 years,

[ricklinc]

Ah, now that would be vigilantism and they would throw the book. Can't have people dispensing any kind of justice that has not been carefully peed on by experts in sociology in the sixties. How many pot parties did you spend discussing the golden age liberal utopia that your generation was going to create, eh? Leave that kind of thing to the enlightened.

[cobblers]

Does seem very lenient. An eight-year custodial sentence (which in my opinion is too low anyway) is the starting point for rapes where any of the following apply: there are two or more offenders, the victim has paced trust in the their attacker, the offender abducts/holds victim captive, it involves the rape of a child or other vulnerable person.

This attack has all those features and more, before you even look at the extremely serious assault occasioning grievous bodily harm with the caustic soda.

The only reason I can think of for such a low sentence (they will serve half their time, ie average of four years) is that they pleaded guilty at the first opportunity (but when you've videoed the whole thing and are bang to rights not sure you should get credit for an early guilty plea) and the judge ruled the assault sentence runs concurrently with the rape sentence.

It is shocking. I think sentencing for crimes against the person should be increased across the board.

[sweet soul]

disgusting sentence.
i can only assume its cos its agains t a child who cannot speak up for herself, i see this more and more when babys and children are abused or killed.

[radge]

this is pretty heavy duty nastiness. My advice though, if you think this is bad, just dont emmigrate to South Africa.

[VikingHumpingWitch]

Jan 21, 2009 14:36:25 GMT @cobblers said:

the judge ruled the assault sentence runs concurrently with the rape sentence

Why do they do this? I mean how is it justifiable - seems to suggest that if you commit two crimes together you effectively get away with one of them. Surely this is blatantly Not Right.

[mids]

It's not, is it? Fair enough if they'd stolen a Curly Wurly from the garage after but not a vicious assault. Stiil, Minge says it's being reviewed so maybe their sentences will get a zero added to the end.

[flatandy]

Seems shockingly, pathetically lenient to me, and I'm a weak-bladdered liberal who'd let almost all other criminals roam-free.

[VikingHumpingWitch]

We have two known bedwetters on this thread who think these sentences are appallingly low. Therefore I challenge Rick to find one single damp mattress owner who thinks they are "unacceptably harsh," or retract the statement in message 3.

[puffin]

Far,far too lenient.
I hope that when it comes up for review it is very considerably increased.
If we can't protect the vunerable in our society what hope is there for anyone?

[radge]

I think Muderers, rapists, torturers and any other violent criminal activity should be a locking up, offence. If it aint violent then dont lock them up because the idea of locking someone up is to keep them away from the general public. it is in the general publics interest that violence is kept off our streets, but if you havent been violent then you should be punished in an alternative manner.

[justmyopinion]

Let's hope that the traditional values of prison officers leaking the offence occasioning inmate rough justice persists

[Woolf]

If there is any justice in the prison system, these three should be sh1itting themselves any time they are left alone.