Friday, 24 May 2013

On The Contrary, Judge, It’s Pretty Enviable…

Judge Peter Johnson said Davies had an “unenviable record”.
After all, in any other country, a man who’d clocked up 20 convictions would be looking at life behind bars. Or worse. Certainly not the sort of suspended sentence you've just dished out.
Carolyn Branford-Wood, prosecuting, said the thief also caused damage that cost the salon owners £1,300 to repair.
The attack came just months after owners of 16 years Tanya and Dave Hutton spent thousands of pounds revamping the premises.
 Mitigation is...well, pretty much as you'd expect:
Rob Griffiths, mitigating, said: “It was Christmas time and he wanted some money so he went out and committed a burglary. Other people would save up but that’s not how he operates. This was not a terribly sophisticated operation.”
 It seems to be achieving its objective with no adverse consequences. Does it need to be 'sophisticated'?
“He is familiar with institutional life and it causes him no problems.”
 And that's the real issue, isn't it? Does the judge buy this hogwash?
“I have no doubt that you have caused a great deal of upset and distress to the owner, and I have no doubt there will be concerns which remain in the mind and continue to remain in the mind as to whether it might happen again,” he said.
 Oh oh...
The judge said he faced a “stark choice”, but a pre-sentence report had suggested there may be “green shoots” of change in Davies.
*hurls PC across room*
at

4 comments:

  1. Fidel Cuntstruck24 May 2013 at 12:34

    The judge said he faced a “stark choice”, but a pre-sentence report had suggested there may be “green shoots” of change in Davies.

    No your Honour, those are probably just the Carrots growing out of his ears - he probably doesn't wash too often what with him being a poor disenfranchished victim of society and all that

    ReplyDelete
  2. James Higham24 May 2013 at 15:38

    *hurls PC across room*

    Precisely my reaction, followed by burying face deep in palms, rocking slowly and moaning, then going for the whisky.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous24 May 2013 at 22:16

    Following the defence brief's comments, the punishment doesn't have to be terribly sophisticated, merely include the words, 'banged up', 'bread and water', 'no privileges' and 'ten years' all of which would help restore my rapidly failing faith in British justice.
    Penseivat

    ReplyDelete
  4. JuliaM26 May 2013 at 06:04

    "... the punishment doesn't have to be terribly sophisticated, merely include the words, 'banged up', 'bread and water', 'no privileges' and 'ten years' all of which would help restore my rapidly failing faith in British justice."

    I'm not sure anything could restore mine, at this point... :/

    ReplyDelete