Tuesday, 5 December 2017

Surely This Should Have Been 'Consecutively'?

Bourdon-Pierre, of Udimore Road, Rye, and Smith of Piltdown Close, Hastings, were found guilty unanimously by the jury.
Sentencing them, Judge McCreath, said: “I accept the defendants are regretful at what they did, but I am unable to accept they are remorseful in the true sense. After all they spent the trial trying to persuade the jury they were acting in self-defence and the victims were to some extent responsible.”
Smith cried in the dock as the pair’s sentence was read out. Both were given eight years for manslaughter and three years for GBH, to run concurrently.
Nice to hear a judge tell it like it is for once...

3 comments:

Northish said...

Concurrent sentencing just means that there is no incentive to stop. Commit another crime? no problem, you wont serve any more time, as long as it's not your worst. It should always be consecutive for each offence, with an additional 20% for the second, 30% for the third so that multiple offences result in progressively longer gaol time. Lets try it for a few years and watch crime fall.

Sobers said...

A rather ironic address really for one of the defendants - Piltdown Close. If you're searching for the missing link we know where to look........

JuliaM said...

"Concurrent sentencing just means that there is no incentive to stop."

That's our 'justice' system for you...

"A rather ironic address really for one of the defendants - Piltdown Close. "

Ha! I totally missed that! :D