|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Aug 22, 2024 17:25:52 GMT
A child rapist is spared jail due to the prison overcrowding crisis as judge admits 'it would have been virtually inevitable that you would have gone into custody'. Rees Newman, 33, was handed a suspended sentence last December for the historic rape of a girl under the age of 14, in 2005. Under the terms of his sentence he was ordered to sign the sex offenders' register and notify police if he went on holiday - but in May he jetted off to Egypt without telling officers. Newman was hauled back before a judge at Newport Crown Court this week but – despite admitting breaching the terms of his sentence - he avoided prison a second time. Judge Tracey Lloyd-Clarke, the Recorder of Cardiff, jailed Newman for two months but suspended his imprisonment for 18 months. www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13768989/child-rapist-spared-jail-prison-overcrowding.htmlFortunately he was only charged with (and found guilty of) child rape and breaching the terms of his 'sentence'. Had he be found guilty of a more serious offence, shouting at a 'far right' demonstration or offending someone on Twitter, for instance, then a prison cell would certainly have been found somewhere. |
|
|
|
Post by johnofgwent on Aug 22, 2024 18:56:30 GMT
The interesting bit is even when faced with the fact a child rapist has escaped jail because of Starmer's actions in halting imprisonment, the twats printing the article claim his restrictions don't apply to sex offenders....
Yet here we see they clearly do
If he were Pakistani it would be obvious why pursuit of their cultural norms means no jail
Strange for the same to apply to a white man...
Oh, wait, is he a white islamic ??
|
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Aug 22, 2024 19:48:46 GMT
But if he'd slated the government he'd be feeling the "Full force of the law".
|
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Aug 22, 2024 20:14:25 GMT
One would assume Starmer is not a stupid man, yes indeed assumption has always been the mother of all cock ups. Apparently he cant see how unpopular he is. Is this because he is surrounded by left wing civil service sycophants like Sue Gray. History would suggest this fits in well with left wing socialist authoritarianism, anyone who thinks this will not end in tears is a bloody fool.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Aug 22, 2024 20:47:30 GMT
One would assume Starmer is not a stupid man... Well yes and no. I've said for many years that leftism is, or is at least akin to, a mental illness. And you can tell a paranoid schizophrenic that their delusions aren't real but they won't believe you because for them it's reality. And it's the same for lefties. It matters not how often reality intrudes because they still believe in the mission. And there's no reasoning with it. So yeah, it's like a cross between mental illness and religion (which, come to mench, are pretty much the same things anyway). |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Aug 22, 2024 20:59:33 GMT
One would assume Starmer is not a stupid man... Well yes and no. I've said for many years that leftism is, or is at least akin to, a mental illness. And you can tell a paranoid schizophrenic that their delusions aren't real but they won't believe you because for them it's reality. And it's the same for lefties. It matters not how often reality intrudes because they still believe in the mission. And there's no reasoning with it. So yeah, it's like a cross between mental illness and religion (which, come to mench, are pretty much the same things anyway). LOL a superb critique. So in summary - paranoid schizophrenic and a Labour voter, are much the same. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Aug 22, 2024 21:24:49 GMT
A child rapist is spared jail due to the prison overcrowding crisis as judge admits 'it would have been virtually inevitable that you would have gone into custody'. Rees Newman, 33, was handed a suspended sentence last December for the historic rape of a girl under the age of 14, in 2005. Under the terms of his sentence he was ordered to sign the sex offenders' register and notify police if he went on holiday - but in May he jetted off to Egypt without telling officers. Newman was hauled back before a judge at Newport Crown Court this week but – despite admitting breaching the terms of his sentence - he avoided prison a second time. Judge Tracey Lloyd-Clarke, the Recorder of Cardiff, jailed Newman for two months but suspended his imprisonment for 18 months. www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13768989/child-rapist-spared-jail-prison-overcrowding.htmlFortunately he was only charged with (and found guilty of) child rape and breaching the terms of his 'sentence'. Had he be found guilty of a more serious offence, shouting at a 'far right' demonstration or offending someone on Twitter, for instance, then a prison cell would certainly have been found somewhere. Given that he was only given a suspended sentence and that at the time of the crime he (like the victim) was 14, I suspect this was more a case of 2 underage kids having a fumble in the long grass rather than a violent attack. If so why would anyone want to put him in prison? |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Aug 22, 2024 21:44:27 GMT
Given that he was only given a suspended sentence and that at the time of the crime he (like the victim) was 14, I suspect this was more a case of 2 underage kids having a fumble in the long grass rather than a violent attack. If so why would anyone want to put him in prison? You describe it as a fumble in the grass, the courts described it as rape. The two are not remotely similar. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Aug 22, 2024 21:51:07 GMT
I dont know the specifics of this particular case but any sexual activity with a child under 16, whether by consent or not, is a crime.
So in the case of 2 14 year olds having consensual sex the boy will be committing an offence for which he can be charged.
|
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Aug 22, 2024 22:17:43 GMT
I dont know the specifics of this particular case but any sexual activity with a child under 16, whether by consent or not, is a crime. So in the case of 2 14 year olds having consensual sex the boy will be committing an offence for which he can be charged. Pacifico, think of it like this. It was your 14 year old daughter. |
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Aug 23, 2024 3:32:22 GMT
Crimes like this warrant rope.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Aug 23, 2024 6:44:01 GMT
I dont know the specifics of this particular case but any sexual activity with a child under 16, whether by consent or not, is a crime. So in the case of 2 14 year olds having consensual sex the boy will be committing an offence for which he can be charged. Pacifico, think of it like this. It was your 14 year old daughter. there is no shortage of 14 year old girls having sex with their boyfriends - whether that deserves to be a crime is arguable. |
|
|
|
Post by johnofgwent on Aug 23, 2024 7:27:39 GMT
I dont know the specifics of this particular case but any sexual activity with a child under 16, whether by consent or not, is a crime. So in the case of 2 14 year olds having consensual sex the boy will be committing an offence for which he can be charged. I take your point regarding specifics. I suppose the first question is what punishment would a 14 year old get ? www.thisisoxfordshire.co.uk/news/24234880.teen-boy-avoids-jail-rape-girl-12-kidlington/Well, a 16 year old, who cannot be named for legal reasons, who at the age of 13 raped a 12 year old girl 'who has since died in circumstances we are not allowed to know' was, three years after the crime, found guilty and handed a 'youth rehabilitation order' with a year's 'intensive supervision' so it seems we do not jail teenage rapists. This is a 'historic' offence and the rapist is now 33. So the question now becomes 'do we jail 33 year olds for a rape committed at the age of 14' It seems from the court remarks that we WOULD if we had the room, and that Sir Fucking Kneel A Lot assured us rapists would not benefit from the need to empty the prisons yet here we are not jailing one because of Mr U Turn's decisions on who to jail and who to release. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Aug 23, 2024 7:33:41 GMT
The jail time would have been for the breach of the terms of the sex offenders register - nothing to do with punishment for the original 'crime'..
|
|
|
|
Post by johnofgwent on Aug 23, 2024 7:47:41 GMT
The jail time would have been for the breach of the terms of the sex offenders register - nothing to do with punishment for the original 'crime'.. Ah, yes, he was supposed to be jailed for not adhering to the exact conditions that were handed out with the non custodial punishment. That slipped my mind. Still looks like Starme's promise not to be lenient to rapists is a bit tattered. Maybe I ought to remind my MP and see if the sentence can be appealed as too lenient and a violation of Starmer's promise. As a fan of the shitbag', her reply would be amusing. |
|
