Friday, 4 January 2013

Never Mind, Judge, It's Unlikely You'll Have To Put Up With Him In Your Neighbourhood, Eh?

A boy of 12 who carried out more than 20 criminal acts was today released without charge - because the courts have no legal way to deal with him.
A judge heard the child's behaviour has 'deteriorated beyond control' but his low IQ means that he cannot properly understand the court process.
The judge described the situation as the 'perfect storm' as there is no way that the court could accept a guilty plea from him, as he cannot understand the implications of his acts, and they could not follow doctor's recommendations, as the boy had not been convicted.
So the only thing they can do it...let him go!
Lian Webster-Martin, defending, said: 'I don't seek to say that an absolute discharge is in the boy's best interest, but we have looked at every possible avenue.'
I expect his foster home is as far away from you as it is from District Judge Callaway's house...

We can't , of course, know his name. That would be inhumane. Apparently.

But I suspect we'll be hearing about him again. And again, and again, and again...
at

8 comments:

  1. Robert the Biker4 January 2013 at 11:06

    Hopefully, he will soon pick on the wrong person and get the living shit kicked out of him, bet he understands THAT.
    As usual in the Wail, there are pleas to 'understand' the little turd, but few expressions of sympathy for his victims.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Tatty4 January 2013 at 11:48

    He has the IQ of a dog. For his sake...and everyone else's...send in Caesar Milan !

    ReplyDelete
  3. microdave4 January 2013 at 13:18

    "The courts have no legal way to deal with him"

    I've said it before....

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=04clpd7h0b0

    ReplyDelete
  4. Furor Teutonicus4 January 2013 at 13:27

    XX his low IQ means that he cannot properly understand the court process.XX

    Then, he can not properly understand LIFE, and should be locked up for his own good. (AND everyone elses!)

    ReplyDelete
  5. Fahrenheit2114 January 2013 at 13:48

    If there is one amendment to the law that I'd like to see, it would be a repeal of those sections of the Children and Young Persons Act and the Criminal Justice Acts, that prevents the naming of criminals who are under 18 years old.

    Just because a dangerous crim is under 18 doesn't mean that they are less of a problem.

    Yes I can see the arguement that naming these crims may affect their adult life but frankly I don't give a toss about that. If you are old enough to do a crime then you are old enough to be seen to be a crim.

    Also another reason for naming under 18 crims is so that parents know which little shits to keep their own kids away from.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anonymous4 January 2013 at 17:36

    "his low IQ means that he cannot properly understand the court process"

    Was this the judge or the boy?

    ReplyDelete
  7. James Higham4 January 2013 at 18:58

    A boy of 12 who carried out more than 20 criminal acts was today released without charge - because the courts have no legal way to deal with him.

    Clip over the ear?

    ReplyDelete
  8. JuliaM5 January 2013 at 08:53

    "He has the IQ of a dog. For his sake...and everyone else's...send in Caesar Milan !"

    Depends on the dog, surely? This guy's at Labrador level!

    "Then, he can not properly understand LIFE, and should be locked up for his own good."

    Indeed!

    "If you are old enough to do a crime then you are old enough to be seen to be a crim."

    Spot on! I bet he's well-known in his area. And I wouldn't be too surprised to see someone taking the law into their own hands...

    ReplyDelete