• Welcome, guest!

    This is a forum devoted to discussion of Wolverhampton Wanderers.
    Why not sign up and contribute? Registered members get a fully ad-free experience!

Societal collapse?

Fucking hell, can we not use rapes as a method for point scoring on an internet forum?

There are vile people in all walks of life - it's not restricted to a specific segment of society and the far right hosting riots over specific incidents but not all incidents is simply hypocrisy.
 
I see the 15 year old who raped a 17 year old in Worcester only got 5 years.

That is absolutely astonishing.

He got a lesser sentence because he was under 16, it was his first offence, and he pled guilty.

I can't abide by those reasons for a lower sentence.
 
An early guilty plea has always been a factor in sentencing mitigation for every criminal offence under the laws of England and Wales. Like literally for at least living memory.
Similarly, lower sentences for those aged under 16 at the time an offence has been committed have been on the statute book for a very long time indeed.
Lower sentencing guidelines for first offences actually make sense because an offence by a repeat offender is a more serious thing in the eyes of the law because it is an indication of recidivist behaviour, which is an exacerbating factor.

So I have no problem whatsoever with those three factors in a sentencing decision.

The sentence in this case is at the lower end of the sentencing scale for rape, which is 4-5 years in the very lowest cases.

So in summary, without reading the full facts of the case and the judge's sentencing remarks, I don't see anything outlandish or astonishing at all under the current sentencing guidelines.
 
There's a difference between the law being consistent and the law being right.

My issue with first offence as mitigation for rape specifically is this repeat offending should be an aggravating factor that increases the sentence, not first offending being a mitigating factor that reduces it!

The baseline should be the full sentence.

Also the current definitive guideline is from 2015 not ancient history at all.

Two rapists, same week, vastly different sentences. That's worth examining regardless of whether it's technically consistent with the guidelines.
 
Okay, let's go back to the early guilty plea. Specifically in a rape case. Have you any experience of what a rape victim goes through in court? THAT is why mitigation for an early guilty plea should be there.
 
Elephant Pyjamas said:
Two rapists, same week, vastly different sentences. That's worth examining regardless of whether it's technically consistent with the guidelines.
Click to expand...
Every case is judged on its specific facts, circumstances, and merits in sentencing. Even the mandatory life sentence for murder has differences in tariff depending on mitigating or exacerbating factors.

As I say, the sentencing remarks from the judges in both cases would make an interesting comparison.
 
Paddingtonwolf said:
Okay, let's go back to the early guilty plea. Specifically in a rape case. Have you any experience of what a rape victim goes through in court? THAT is why mitigation for an early guilty plea should be there.
Click to expand...


I didn't realise I needed personal experience of a rape victim to have a view on whether 5 years probably less, is an adequate sentence for rape?

By that logic nobody outside the legal profession or victim community can have an opinion on sentencing at all.

That said fair point on the guilty plea. Sparing a rape victim the trauma of cross examination is genuinely meaningful, whilst the victim benefits from the guilty plea, conversely they also have to live with knowing their rapist is out in 2-3 years,

So the guilty plea discount and the youth discount stack on top of each other on an already low starting point, and you end up with a sentence that doesn't reflect the severity of the crime or the ongoing risk this person poses.

The law being consistent with the guidelines and the guidelines being fit for purpose are two different things. I'm questioning the latter, you are simply making excuses for it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top