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 Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Because he apologised... disgraceful. Someone like that is only apologetic because they got caught. I'm sure the victims take on board his apology 🤨" It does sound very lenient. Maybe has a public figure he should have been made an example how. Any idea how hid punishment compares to similar offenders. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So people get jailed for saying racist things online or inciting the riots (as they should - prison capacity notwithstanding). But someone who solicited obscene paedo images gets a suspended sentence? WTAF" Report stated he would have got a year. I assume a year in prison. We should not have to assume though. Anything connected to the @buse of children should automatically receive incarceration! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why is anyone surprised he is in the upper classes circle,dude was never gona see the inside of a prison,I doubt he even saw the inside of a cell in the police station when he was first nicked for it,and let's not forget he got paid 200 grand while suspendedfrom the suckers who pay the tv licence " But he's done such a good job at spreading lies, misinformation, propaganda and bullshit for the establishment...a slap on the wrist for such a horrible crime is what should be expecte for a person of his standing. Maybe he holds a few truth bombs that they dare not risk getting exposed. A regular person would've gotten a few years in jail at least. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Stick him in belmarsh for a couple of years that'll sort him out!" Well, that’s not happening | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why is anyone surprised he is in the upper classes circle,dude was never gona see the inside of a prison,I doubt he even saw the inside of a cell in the police station when he was first nicked for it,and let's not forget he got paid 200 grand while suspendedfrom the suckers who pay the tv licence " Huw Edwards is upper class, is he? I never knew | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He must know something about someone!" The sentence is either in accordance with guidelines or it isn’t. I don’t think they suddenly invent different sentences out if fear that he might know “something about someone”. If he held that amount of power then the story would never have come out. It did. The guy is destroyed. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why is anyone surprised he is in the upper classes circle,dude was never gona see the inside of a prison,I doubt he even saw the inside of a cell in the police station when he was first nicked for it,and let's not forget he got paid 200 grand while suspendedfrom the suckers who pay the tv licence Huw Edwards is upper class, is he? I never knew " I never said he was upper class I said he was in there circle,my my you really should actually read what people write instead of jumping In with both feet | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Its the judges or law makers that need looking at, You could go back years and find hundreds of sick cunts getting off with a lenient sentence " Are you criticising the laws for being too lenient? Judges can only implement the laws that are there. They can’t just invent punishments | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why is anyone surprised he is in the upper classes circle,dude was never gona see the inside of a prison,I doubt he even saw the inside of a cell in the police station when he was first nicked for it,and let's not forget he got paid 200 grand while suspendedfrom the suckers who pay the tv licence Huw Edwards is upper class, is he? I never knew I never said he was upper class I said he was in there circle,my my you really should actually read what people write instead of jumping In with both feet" Who are the “upper class” people he mixes with? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Its the judges or law makers that need looking at, You could go back years and find hundreds of sick cunts getting off with a lenient sentence Are you criticising the laws for being too lenient? Judges can only implement the laws that are there. They can’t just invent punishments " I think the poster is pointing out it's down to those who guide the length of sentences so that there is some standardisation of sentencing. It is this that needs looking at. If incitement to make racist attacks is severely punished, so too for senders and recipients of indecent images as this is incitement to @buse. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"i also want to know what who and happened to convicted pedo who he paid to send him the pics/vids etc?" He had a six month suspended as well | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"i also want to know what who and happened to convicted pedo who he paid to send him the pics/vids etc? He had a six month suspended as well" 12 months, I thought? But yeah, suspended | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Oh he has suffered mental health issues because he didn't get into Oxford and felt an outcast at BBC (news at 6). Diddums" I did find that a bit of a head scratcher … not exactly an example of hardship, and zero relevance to the charges. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He must know something about someone! The sentence is either in accordance with guidelines or it isn’t. I don’t think they suddenly invent different sentences out if fear that he might know “something about someone”. If he held that amount of power then the story would never have come out. It did. The guy is destroyed. " Destroyed! It's the children who are destroyed. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"There are people on here who were glad JSO got heavy sentences without opinions like those those sentences would have been hard to justify. When it came to the large Israel protests people said they should be locked up. But now Hue Edwards has been let off it is disgusting, but it is people like yourselves who allow/let these kind of things to happen. I watched the coverage yesterday outside Westminster mags' they had a child @buse solicitor who was scathing against hue Edwards so scathing they changed the solicitor to lord Faulkner who then proceeded to discuss how eddy would be walking out of court today. Bias, set up T.V." Why compare totally different issues? They are totally incomparable. How do we allow these things to happen? I've already mentioned sentencing guidelines and standardisation. Set up TV? If they had one anti the sentencing and another explaining the sentencing, how is that a set up? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Because he apologised... disgraceful. Someone like that is only apologetic because they got caught. I'm sure the victims take on board his apology 🤨" No, it wasn’t just because he apologised. There are far more factors considered. But yes, most of what he is feeling right now is probably self-pity and shame for being caught and having his career destroyed. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He must know something about someone! The sentence is either in accordance with guidelines or it isn’t. I don’t think they suddenly invent different sentences out if fear that he might know “something about someone”. If he held that amount of power then the story would never have come out. It did. The guy is destroyed. Destroyed! It's the children who are destroyed. " Exactly! If Huw has destroyed his career, relationships and reputation, and suffering with his mental health, they're the natural consequences of what he did. It's not punishment. But then neither is a suspended sentence 🤨. The children are innocent but they will suffer. The @buse will affect their mental health and future relationships and possibly prevent/delay opportunities for successful careers! But it's OK, he apologised 🤨 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"There are people on here who were glad JSO got heavy sentences without opinions like those those sentences would have been hard to justify. When it came to the large Israel protests people said they should be locked up. But now Hue Edwards has been let off it is disgusting, but it is people like yourselves who allow/let these kind of things to happen. I watched the coverage yesterday outside Westminster mags' they had a child @buse solicitor who was scathing against hue Edwards so scathing they changed the solicitor to lord Faulkner who then proceeded to discuss how eddy would be walking out of court today. Bias, set up T.V." Not sure what you’re saying there Ben, I don’t follow the logic. You say people were happy for JSO to received heavy sentences, and that people also wanted the Israel protestors locked up, but then say people are disgusted at the light sentencing in the case of Huw Edwards (no, he wasn’t “let off”). I don’t see any inconsistency in that, people apparently wanting heavy sentences in all 3 cases. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He must know something about someone! The sentence is either in accordance with guidelines or it isn’t. I don’t think they suddenly invent different sentences out if fear that he might know “something about someone”. If he held that amount of power then the story would never have come out. It did. The guy is destroyed. Destroyed! It's the children who are destroyed. Exactly! If Huw has destroyed his career, relationships and reputation, and suffering with his mental health, they're the natural consequences of what he did. It's not punishment. But then neither is a suspended sentence 🤨. The children are innocent but they will suffer. The @buse will affect their mental health and future relationships and possibly prevent/delay opportunities for successful careers! But it's OK, he apologised 🤨" Nobody is saying it’s ok because he apologised. Nobody. Completely agree that damage has been done to young people’s lives and that he has contributed to this. I’m bemused that not only did Huw stay out of prison but so did the guy who sent him the material. But doesn’t mean that he has been led off. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He must know something about someone! The sentence is either in accordance with guidelines or it isn’t. I don’t think they suddenly invent different sentences out if fear that he might know “something about someone”. If he held that amount of power then the story would never have come out. It did. The guy is destroyed. Destroyed! It's the children who are destroyed. Exactly! If Huw has destroyed his career, relationships and reputation, and suffering with his mental health, they're the natural consequences of what he did. It's not punishment. But then neither is a suspended sentence 🤨. The children are innocent but they will suffer. The @buse will affect their mental health and future relationships and possibly prevent/delay opportunities for successful careers! But it's OK, he apologised 🤨 Nobody is saying it’s ok because he apologised. Nobody. Completely agree that damage has been done to young people’s lives and that he has contributed to this. I’m bemused that not only did Huw stay out of prison but so did the guy who sent him the material. But doesn’t mean that he has been led off. " Inferred that from the suspended sentence (and I know there were other factors - pleading guilty in a timely manner and his mental health). | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He must know something about someone! The sentence is either in accordance with guidelines or it isn’t. I don’t think they suddenly invent different sentences out if fear that he might know “something about someone”. If he held that amount of power then the story would never have come out. It did. The guy is destroyed. Destroyed! It's the children who are destroyed. Exactly! If Huw has destroyed his career, relationships and reputation, and suffering with his mental health, they're the natural consequences of what he did. It's not punishment. But then neither is a suspended sentence 🤨. The children are innocent but they will suffer. The @buse will affect their mental health and future relationships and possibly prevent/delay opportunities for successful careers! But it's OK, he apologised 🤨 Nobody is saying it’s ok because he apologised. Nobody. Completely agree that damage has been done to young people’s lives and that he has contributed to this. I’m bemused that not only did Huw stay out of prison but so did the guy who sent him the material. But doesn’t mean that he has been led off. Inferred that from the suspended sentence (and I know there were other factors - pleading guilty in a timely manner and his mental health)." There’s a bit of a gap between what many of us consider a light sentence and “it’s ok, he apologised” though. I’m pretty sure that nobody thinks it is “ok” | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And from the same channel, 8 out of 10 people caught in possession of this material do not go to prison, assuming its their first offence. The government has asked the high chief justice or whatever the title is of the top UK judge to review it. I think it will be changed as its in the public interest but realistically it will be a year with possibility of probation after 6 months. Again as difficult as it is to accept is that possession of pictures is not the same crime as acting out and a person can only be tried for crimes they have committed. I'm sure nobody would bat an eyelid if he was was sent to the guillotine and maybe the sentencing guidelines might get reviwed after this but as said above it does fall within them at present. But then if you look at the sentencing guidelines for possession of it's up to 5 years in prison. I don't honestly see that ever happening " Yeah, although most of us are scratching our heads at lack of prison time, this isn’t exactly an outlier in terms of sentencing. It would actually have been a more unusual outcome if he had been sent to prison. I don’t agree with the idea of suddenly making sentences harsher because of one case that is in the public eye. That sort of knee-jerk reaction is not the right way for the justice system to operate. The comments about “torching”, executing, guillotining offenders … that’s not the way this country should operate. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And from the same channel, 8 out of 10 people caught in possession of this material do not go to prison, assuming its their first offence. The government has asked the high chief justice or whatever the title is of the top UK judge to review it. I think it will be changed as its in the public interest but realistically it will be a year with possibility of probation after 6 months. Again as difficult as it is to accept is that possession of pictures is not the same crime as acting out and a person can only be tried for crimes they have committed. I'm sure nobody would bat an eyelid if he was was sent to the guillotine and maybe the sentencing guidelines might get reviwed after this but as said above it does fall within them at present. But then if you look at the sentencing guidelines for possession of it's up to 5 years in prison. I don't honestly see that ever happening Yeah, although most of us are scratching our heads at lack of prison time, this isn’t exactly an outlier in terms of sentencing. It would actually have been a more unusual outcome if he had been sent to prison. I don’t agree with the idea of suddenly making sentences harsher because of one case that is in the public eye. That sort of knee-jerk reaction is not the right way for the justice system to operate. The comments about “torching”, executing, guillotining offenders … that’s not the way this country should operate. " I made a post about incomparable with JSO sentencing (personally think this is worse), but is comparable, "incitement to riot" on social media is comparable to incitement to abuse through send/receive such abhorrent images. Therefore sentencing does need increasing to ensure jail time. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
