Friday, 20 May 2011

Well, Technically, He Won’t Repeat The Offence…

…after all, he doesn’t have any other parents, does he?
A 35-year-old who butchered his elderly parents in their own home after his mother threw a book at him had his sentence slashed by top judges this week.
That should be ‘after his mother allegedly threw a book at him', should it?

Or was there a witness?
He later told a psychiatrist that he snapped after his mother hurled a book at him and spoke to him in “derogatory” terms.
I guess that’s a ‘no’ then….
Dighton was put behind bars indefinitely for public protection (IPP) - a sentence which is almost identical to a life term - at the Old Bailey last October after he was convicted of manslaughter on grounds of diminished responsibility.

His case reached the Appeal Court as Dighton’s lawyers challenged the 15-year minimum term he was ordered to serve before he can even apply for parole.
And it’s really no surprise he managed to find a bleeding heart judge, is it?
Mr Justice Langstaff, sitting with Lord Justice Pill and Mrs Justice Macur, said Dighton had expressed “real remorse” and was guilty of an act of sudden rage against two people he had loved.

“We have come to the conclusion that the minimum term for these distressing and horrible offences was simply too high,” concluded the judge, cutting the term from 15 to 12 years.
I’d like to say it’s academic, because there’s still no guarantee he’ll ever be released, but I can guarantee one thing – if he ever is, he won’t be a neighbour of Mr Justice Langstaff, Lord Justice Pill or Mrs Justice Macur, will he?

10 comments:

Shinar's Basket Case said...

Jools, as a self confessed female you couldn't possibly understand.

Men and their Mothers (and Mothers-in-law). Have any of us males NOT felt like strangling the old bat at some point?



Before anyone accuses me of being flippant or making light of a hideous crime do bear in mind that not only in wine but in humour there is truth....sometimes.

Angry Exile said...

Why do these judges all have the same first name? I tell you something, if I have kids I'm certainly not going to call them Justice when it's becoming clear that anyone with that name grows up to become a complete fuckmong?

;-)

Henry Crun said...

Dighton should have pleaded clemency on the grounds that he is an orphan. I'm sure some judge or other would have taken it into account.

Woman on a Raft said...

Just goes to show: if Bamber had said "OK, I slaughtered the lot but I'm telling you, they weren't very nice to me" he'd be out by now.

Anonymous said...

OK Mum threw a book and was rude, but what did Dad do?

Shinar's Basket Case said...

What did Dad do? Ah well, during his fit of psychotic rage the 'victim' (ie what you and I would call, in our reactionary unenlightened way, the 'perp') suddenly found all his suppressed memories unlocked.

All those memories of being 'abused' by his father (ie what you and I would call, in our reactionary unenlightened way,'not being allowed to go to MC Donalds more than once a week')

Laban said...

35, jobless, and gets up late after a night on the lash. No wonder she threw the book at him.

It's a terrible thing for a child to be at home after, say, 25 max. But housing is so expensive these days I fear there are probably a lot more 'kids' at home than there used to be.

btw, what sort of holiday do you take where you need to pack knives? Were they going to Naples or Montevideo?

Woman on a Raft said...

The Court News account gives details of the original conviction. At one point the parents had set him up with a flat of his own, but he had been unable to cope and returned home so his mother could continue to cook and clean for him.

Their main mistake seems to have been soft-heartedness and an unwillingness to face the limitations of their only son. He gradually embroidered a rich fantasy life which partially convinced his friends but was more and more at variance with his real life.

It got through as diminished responsibility possibly because nobody can quite credit the depth of spite he harboured towards his parents. A sudden loss of control is a better explanation to the rational mind, as if the victim 'must have' done something which triggered it.

He says they riled him. Well, he would, wouldn't he?

We - and especially that great pudding Clarke - need to face the fact that some of these people are irrecoverable and will need detention for the rest of their lives both to express society's view towards their crime and to prevent anyone else being their victim.

http://www.courtnewsuk.co.uk/c_crime_magazine__the_latest_stories/a_daniel_dighton/crime_vaults/

Mjolinir said...

Should have got another few years off - 'cos he's an orphan.

JuliaM said...

"Why do these judges all have the same first name? I tell you something, if I have kids I'm certainly not going to call them Justice..."

Heh!

"btw, what sort of holiday do you take where you need to pack knives? Were they going to Naples or Montevideo?"

Or Croydon?

"Their main mistake seems to have been soft-heartedness and an unwillingness to face the limitations of their only son."

Exasperating, indeed. The death penalty seems a bit harsh, though.