Jason Reed was handed the lengthy prison term by Judge Carol Hagen earlier this month.Six years shouldn't be considered 'lengthy' for someone with his record, given we know he won't serve all of it. But even so...
She had previously offered Reed the chance to reform, sentencing him to drug treatment and a suspended prison term when he could have been jailed as a persistent offender last year.
He then carried out 22 more break-ins and was jailed for six years.And there we'd leave it. But...
But the judge decided she had failed to take account of Reed's help to police in clearing up his crimes – and yesterday she had him brought back to court under the "slip rule", which gives the court the power to alter a sentence within 56 days of it being made.*sigh*
The judge detailed how she formed her view after considering how police had written to her and said Reed had taken them on "drive rounds" and cleared up 49 unsolved burglaries, which had provided closure for the associated victims.
Police also confirmed remorseful Reed, 39, had been doing well in his fight to get off drugs before relapsing, and had targeted homes he thought were unoccupied.Well, it's nice that the police get to boost their clean-up rate, isn't it?
But he's not just a burglar, is he?
In 2004 Reed was jailed for five years after pleading guilty to rape, indecent assault and false imprisonment of a woman.Is it wicked of me to hope the next window he climbs through after his early release is that of the idiot judge?
What the fucking fuckity fuck do THE POLICE think they are doing providing "mitigation" on behalf of such UTTER SCUM ?!?!?!
ReplyDelete25 years hard and no remission!
ReplyDeleteWhat message does this send out? The MORE burglaries you do,the less time you get? Or if I confess to loads (true or not) then the scumbag gets time off his sentence?
ReplyDeleteThe key thing for me is this; "The judge detailed how she formed her view after considering how police had written to her"
ReplyDeleteSo, the next time Inspector Gadget and his mob whine about how their efforts to tackle crime are being undermined by poor sentencing by judges, I hope you'll excuse a hollow laugh on my part.
And, when this criminal goes on to commit yet more crimes, what's the betting that the police will complain about coalition cuts causing the crime rate to increase?
The police have to tell the judge everything about the defendant.If he admits lots of burglaries then she is entitled to know.What she does with this information is up to her.It's called disclosure and our hands are tied by this.
ReplyDeleteYou can't imagine how much that cheered up me, that your title is "Make up your mind" and not "Make your mind up". You can't beat good grammar.
ReplyDelete"Is it wicked of me to hope the next window he climbs through after his early release is that of the idiot judge?"
ReplyDeleteFar from it. In fact virtually the entire problem with crime and punishment in the UK, on both sides of the dock, is the utter failure of actions to attract real-world consequences to the perpetrators. A habitual, recidivist thief admits to more offences than with which he had been charged, and thereby achieves a reduction in his sentence, instead of an increase (lets see: 49 burglaries at a reasonable tariff per would mean, say, 245 years extra, to be served consecutively, of course.) A drippy judge fails to do her job, thereby exposing the rest of us (but almost certainly not her) to additional harm. In neither case do the negative repercussions fall on the principal actors. A spate of judges being mugged or burgled might do something to stiffen their spines, but as with sentencing, it's not severity but likelihood of outcome that is the decisive factor. So, really, justice would demand that this dopey woman not merely be burgled, but burgled every time she lets a scrote off the hook. That'd learn her.
David I completely agree.
ReplyDelete"What the fucking fuckity fuck do THE POLICE think they are doing providing "mitigation" on behalf of such UTTER SCUM ?!?!?!"
ReplyDeleteThat's the $64,000 question, isn't it?
"What message does this send out?"
Not a very good one about our criminal justice system, I'm afraid.
"So, the next time Inspector Gadget and his mob whine about how their efforts to tackle crime are being undermined by poor sentencing by judges, I hope you'll excuse a hollow laugh on my part. "
Well, quite! I'd go and reference it over there, but it seems I'm being moderated. Yet again.
"You can't beat good grammar."
I cling to my standards in the face of modernism!
"...virtually the entire problem with crime and punishment in the UK, on both sides of the dock, is the utter failure of actions to attract real-world consequences to the perpetrators."
Amen!
A drippy judge fails to do her job, thereby exposing the rest of us (but almost certainly not her) to additional harm
ReplyDeleteI remember reading somewhere a suggestion to set up a social housing charity to buys property adjacent to judges, politicians, high ranking police, and re-house scrotes, jail leavers, druggies, terrorists, etc in them.
I'd contribute.
There are just two things I would like to say. The Criminal Justice system has been in disrepute for many years now, mainly through perceived lack of appropriate sentencing. Then you have the built in dishonesty of whatever sentence he/she gets being automatically cut in half! The ‘point’ is being totally missed here - "Justice has to be SEEN to be done", and that clearly hasn’t happened for quite a while.
ReplyDeleteThere is only one way to cut crime and it’s not rocket science. Increase chances of getting caught, and once caught, deal with them effectively. Simples.
The police officers who colluded with this criminal should be prosecuted.
ReplyDelete