I'm not wholly against severe punishments so long as the sentences delivered across crimes were consistent and proportionate to the crime committed. Unfortunately we've now got the news that the magistrates were given a diktat to throw the sentencing guidelines out the window altogether. It makes a mockery of the rule of law, something which distinguishes this country from many others that it berates and at times, attacks for lacking in sufficient quantities. The real test of democracy and the rule of law is how it functions in troubled times, not when everything is rosy.
As for the expenses scandal, I think the public naming and shaming by the Daily Telegraph will have put some degree of fear into the remaining parliamentarians to avoid such behaviour in the future but you never know, they are politicians after all. A leopard can't change its spots. From a legal and people's perspective, I think it was rather unfortunate that the courts did not (either out of lack of courage/powers) come down as heavy on the worst offenders as they are currently doing with the rioters.
Going back to the chap who was jailed for stealing a crate of water. I had posted earlier about a guy who stole clothes from Burberry but for whatever reason even managed to avoid paying the fine imposed by the judge after spending two days in custody while waiting for his case to be heard. Of course, I don't know the full details and facts of either case so one cannot draw proper conclusions but on the basis of what was printed in the media, it's difficult not to feel somewhat sorry for the water thief. Was it a stupid thing to do? Yes but thanks to the laws of this country, his conviction will not become spent until seven years after serving his sentence. During those seven years he will have to mention his conviction on any job application and even after that he will have to mention it for certain types of jobs.
no subject
As for the expenses scandal, I think the public naming and shaming by the Daily Telegraph will have put some degree of fear into the remaining parliamentarians to avoid such behaviour in the future but you never know, they are politicians after all. A leopard can't change its spots. From a legal and people's perspective, I think it was rather unfortunate that the courts did not (either out of lack of courage/powers) come down as heavy on the worst offenders as they are currently doing with the rioters.
Going back to the chap who was jailed for stealing a crate of water. I had posted earlier about a guy who stole clothes from Burberry but for whatever reason even managed to avoid paying the fine imposed by the judge after spending two days in custody while waiting for his case to be heard. Of course, I don't know the full details and facts of either case so one cannot draw proper conclusions but on the basis of what was printed in the media, it's difficult not to feel somewhat sorry for the water thief. Was it a stupid thing to do? Yes but thanks to the laws of this country, his conviction will not become spent until seven years after serving his sentence. During those seven years he will have to mention his conviction on any job application and even after that he will have to mention it for certain types of jobs.