Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to The Lounge |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Today's justice makes the victim the guilty party. Get rid of redundant laws and why have laws that cannot be enforced? " There is a department which is culling large numbers of out dated laws...;-) Some laws are unenforceable because there are not enough police on patrol... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Most of our laws are enforced just by general consensus. We have a common law system which is always evolving but generally based on a few principles. The devil is in the detail and that's where inequality creeps in - if you can afford a devilish lawyer that can argue the detail..." It would be unfair to stop the lawyers from working, just because some are more astute than others... So do we need to reduce the precedents that they can argue...? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Most of our laws are enforced just by general consensus. We have a common law system which is always evolving but generally based on a few principles. The devil is in the detail and that's where inequality creeps in - if you can afford a devilish lawyer that can argue the detail... It would be unfair to stop the lawyers from working, just because some are more astute than others... So do we need to reduce the precedents that they can argue...?" But which precedents do you choose to outlaw? The riots last summer and rickshaws in London are just two examples where 'old', not recently used, law have been employed to save having to write new law and take it through the full legislative approval process. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Agreeing with a post on another thread... We have two tiered systems in many areas BUT justice is the backbone of society... So... How do we set about sorting it out...? " what do you mean by a two tired system, are people implying that there is one rule for one and another rule for someone else? or that some some people are treated differently to others? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Agreeing with a post on another thread... We have two tiered systems in many areas BUT justice is the backbone of society... So... How do we set about sorting it out...? what do you mean by a two tired system, are people implying that there is one rule for one and another rule for someone else? or that some some people are treated differently to others? " Some people are treated very differently from others. The argument that the harsh sentences meted out for people stealing one shoe as part of the riots is then not followed through for other crimes. Social background can mean that you are given different sentences and some things are not legally a crime (Jimmy Carr and LIBOR fixing, for example). | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Agreeing with a post on another thread... We have two tiered systems in many areas BUT justice is the backbone of society... So... How do we set about sorting it out...? what do you mean by a two tired system, are people implying that there is one rule for one and another rule for someone else? or that some some people are treated differently to others? Some people are treated very differently from others. The argument that the harsh sentences meted out for people stealing one shoe as part of the riots is then not followed through for other crimes. Social background can mean that you are given different sentences and some things are not legally a crime (Jimmy Carr and LIBOR fixing, for example)." jimmy Carr shouldnt come under this argument anyway because what he did was perfectly legal...but thats for a different thread to discuss. as for different sentencing for different people committing the same crime, is there any evidence to support the claim that social background influences sentences??? i can think of lots of cases where this isnt the case. There are always going to be different sentences within the guidlines laid out because every case has mitigation that is considered in court. i know a guy who stole £25k from a bank where he worked and got 2 1/2 years inside.he comes from a respectable background good education and no previous and completely out of character. yet on the same day a woman who stole £350k from a bank where she worked got 15 months. from all reports she came from a council estate with a single parent upbringing. so how does that fit in??? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" jimmy Carr shouldnt come under this argument anyway because what he did was perfectly legal...but thats for a different thread to discuss. as for different sentencing for different people committing the same crime, is there any evidence to support the claim that social background influences sentences??? i can think of lots of cases where this isnt the case. There are always going to be different sentences within the guidlines laid out because every case has mitigation that is considered in court. i know a guy who stole £25k from a bank where he worked and got 2 1/2 years inside.he comes from a respectable background good education and no previous and completely out of character. yet on the same day a woman who stole £350k from a bank where she worked got 15 months. from all reports she came from a council estate with a single parent upbringing. so how does that fit in??? " There will always be differences like this in sentencing. Joseph Rowntree Trust, Barrow Cadbury Trust, Howard League for Penal Reform and the Prison Reform Trust have all carried out research over the years that shows the socio-economic anomalies in sentencing. The Jimmy Carr example was just to illustrate that many might see what he did, albeit legal, shouldn't be. But, PAYE errors on your tax may be illegal if you don't address these - even though it may have been years ago and you were unaware of it. The very fact that our legal system has such anomalies is because of the common law it derives from - protecting property has severe penalties where fraud may not. We don't ship people to Australia anymore but look at what crimes were considered bad enough to lead to transportation. This is a result of the class system that shaped the common law. All of that said there is a reason why many use this model of law and that is that it evolves. And this is a discussion that exercises legislators, judges, lawyers and academics as well as campaigners and the Fab Forum. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Today's justice makes the victim the guilty party. Get rid of redundant laws and why have laws that cannot be enforced? " Many laws cannot be enforced because the authorities simply don't have the resources to enforce them. They don't have the resources because not enough tax is extracted from those who can easily afford to pay more tax. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" what do you mean by a two tiered system, are people implying that there is one rule for one and another rule for someone else? or that some some people are treated differently to others? " Not one rule for one and one rule for another... We all live by the same statute books. My question, well illustrated in various posts above, is how different people receive a two tiered system in resultant treatment of the same statute... More importantly, how do we resolve this issue. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" what do you mean by a two tiered system, are people implying that there is one rule for one and another rule for someone else? or that some some people are treated differently to others? Not one rule for one and one rule for another... We all live by the same statute books. My question, well illustrated in various posts above, is how different people receive a two tiered system in resultant treatment of the same statute... More importantly, how do we resolve this issue. " money cant buy me love, though it can buy me a different reading of that statute. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The very fact that our legal system has such anomalies is because of the common law it derives from - protecting property has severe penalties where fraud may not. We don't ship people to Australia anymore but look at what crimes were considered bad enough to lead to transportation. This is a result of the class system that shaped the common law. All of that said there is a reason why many use this model of law and that is that it evolves. And this is a discussion that exercises legislators, judges, lawyers and academics as well as campaigners and the Fab Forum." Sorry but I have to correct you on a few points there. The Criminal code does not derive from common law. Civil law is about civil matters and derives from case law (precidents set by previous judgements). Criminal law comes from statute (either the Crown or its representatives in parliament) and is not based on precident. Both the definition of a criminal act and the tarif for punishment set for such transgresion is set by statute. Fraud IS a property theft and derives as stiff a penalty as theft of a shoe, severest penalties are haded out (for the most part) for crimes against the person. Neither Civil Law nor Criminal Law depend on class on judgement or on sentencing. If crimes are not prosecuted it's not the Law's fault, it's the fault of the Criminal Prosecution Service (CPS). If the CPS decide it's not in the public interest to prosecute then the case is not prosecuted. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Neither Civil Law nor Criminal Law depend on class on judgement or on sentencing. If crimes are not prosecuted it's not the Law's fault, it's the fault of the Criminal Prosecution Service (CPS). If the CPS decide it's not in the public interest to prosecute then the case is not prosecuted." And yet... If a prosecution is brought... There is a definite two tiered system in its treatment. If you and I are prosecuted for the same act, one of us could be treated differently from the other. It is this injust justice that I would like to see eradicated and my post is to ask the forum for ideas as to how to start this process... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Neither Civil Law nor Criminal Law depend on class on judgement or on sentencing. If crimes are not prosecuted it's not the Law's fault, it's the fault of the Criminal Prosecution Service (CPS). If the CPS decide it's not in the public interest to prosecute then the case is not prosecuted. And yet... If a prosecution is brought... There is a definite two tiered system in its treatment. If you and I are prosecuted for the same act, one of us could be treated differently from the other. " That may be the case , as i said in a previous post above about 2 bank theftsn but it is unlikely to be due to social background as people think. it is more likely to be down to interpretation by the judge/magistrate and/or mitigating circumstances. it is highly unlikley that 2 people would be sentenced for exactly the same crime as there will always be different circumstances. even 2 people robbing a bank together can be sentenced differently due to how teh judge sees each persons part in the crime. we all know there are punishments that seem to defy logic when we dont know all the details of each individual case. but it is seldom due to class or social backgound. My brother is a magistrate and i have 2 cousins who are barristers and they will all argue that point very effectivley, evry crime is different and has to be dealt with as such. its very easy for people who feel hard done to, by the justice system to blame class or background. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yes, we do have a two tier legal system, one to defend the rights of scum to rob, attack, assault and frighten the innocent, and one to prevent people/police/courts from actually fighting back against the epidemic of lawless anti social behaviour blighting millions of lives. xx Solution? well, political parties unafraid to tear up ridiculous human rights laws, pass legislation enforcing mass incarceration, forced labour, right to form community protection groups etc The USA is a violent country, as is the UK, but in the USA you will actually spend time in jail for committing violent crime. Here you will be let off and let off and let off, unless you are a single mum who over claimed for housing benefit or something, then you'll be sent down." And yet the US of A has a very large and ever growing prison population. So, as a deterrent, the stiff sentences, including death in some states for murder, really is working isn't it? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Agreeing with a post on another thread... We have two tiered systems in many areas BUT justice is the backbone of society... So... How do we set about sorting it out...? " get a zimmer? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Agreeing with a post on another thread... We have two tiered systems in many areas BUT justice is the backbone of society... So... How do we set about sorting it out...? what do you mean by a two tired system, are people implying that there is one rule for one and another rule for someone else? or that some some people are treated differently to others? " well in reality the police are far more likely to follow up a big crime rather than a small one - for example my neighbour threatening to kill me for complaining about noise. They would only take the threat seriously if he actually broke my door in or actually killed me. Great news eh? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" My brother is a magistrate and i have 2 cousins who are barristers and they will all argue that point very effectivley, evry crime is different and has to be dealt with as such. " So... Please ask them... Two identical crimes, two different punishments... Why...? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" My brother is a magistrate and i have 2 cousins who are barristers and they will all argue that point very effectivley, every crime is different and has to be dealt with as such. So... Please ask them... Two identical crimes, two different punishments... Why...? " like i said. its rare to have 2 identical crimes. every one has different circumstances and mitigation, level of intent, breach of trust etc... what may seem to us on the outside to be the same crime may have totally different circumstance. your implication that we have a 2 tier system suggests that different people are treated in a different tier of the justice system and it isnt the case. yes, there are different punishments for what we may think are identical crimes but some posters suggest that social backround affects the sentencing and there is no evidence of that. The sentencing guidline are the same for every one. they dont say that if you come from a particular background that the sentences should be different. Guidelines are exactly that,a guideline, and they are the same for each catagory of crime. The different sentences will be down to how the judge or magistrate interprets the severity of the crime and all the circumstances surrounding it. My brother has no consideration for social background when he sits on the bench. he sees an accused person who he has never met before and hears the case. If they convict, they decide on the punishment based on the guidlines for that offence. Out of interest do you have a particular reason for thinking that we have a 2 tier system? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"My personal pet hate about our legal system is that we tend to act on outcome rather than intent and action. This is most easily seen in dangerous driving cases, if someone gets caught for dangerous driving where though the actions of others no harm was caused you get a minimal sentance. Yet when a person takes exactly the same actions but ends up causing injury or worse because the other parties fail to react as effectively then they get the book thrown at them (or at least sometimes, if the police don't manage to loose all the evidence, but thats another story)." i see what you are saying, but that is where the mitigation element comes in. there is always consideration for the consequences of the crime as well as the crime itself. That is allowed within the sentencing guidleines. if you punch someone and break their jaw you are likely to get stiffer sentence than if you just bruise them for example. The level of intent could be deemed to be equal yet one incident led to more serious consequences. would you say then that each should have been punished in the same way? if so. people then argue that that is also unfair. The same sentence if you steal £1 or £1 million???? that will never be the case even though the crime, as laid out in statue, would be the same ie 'Theft from a person' | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Out of interest do you have a particular reason for thinking that we have a 2 tier system?" Firstly... Thankyou for the part of your reply that I havent quoted. In answer to your question... I have no personal anecdote. Mine is a perception gained by media reporting, either radio 4, BBC TV or very occasionally a red top newspaper. Whilst none of the above are without business interest to gain public following by sensationalisation, I do trust the BBC to be less irresponsible than the rest. The base of my premis, which I have since expanded upon, came from the case of an american supercelebrity who committed a serious offence. From which the observation came about that had this person not been in a position to before celebrity barristers... Would the outcome have been different. From this, and other instances, I perceive a two tiered justice system in this and at least two other european countries in which I have resided. From your responses I do question now my premis and will engage in discussion with other formative sources... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
