Huw Edwards - 6 month suspended sentence (pg 107)

kaz7 said:
The poster i was replying to likes to put out one liners , thinks it is edgy , have told him the woman was telling the mob to murder a hotel full of people , no two cases are the same as he well knows

Edwards should be in prison, of course he should
Click to expand...
Sorry i didnt see the previous post
 
LangleyBlue1970 said:
They don’t admit they’re wrong.
Click to expand...

It would seem that way.

Back your political opinions by all means to the last but to try and deflect from a deviants crimes like this by comparing them to a post on social media he clearly didn’t like for political reasons is a step too far.

Tories have been wished dead on here by posters. Tongue in cheek I hope but it’s words on a forum. I didn’t see the clamour to have them locked up at the time?
 
LangleyBlue1970 said:
Both evil and sick? The threats were online ones, likely posted by people who wouldn’t even dare carry out said threat, just gobshites. The other is a now convicted nonce.

You need to get your morals straight, and fast.
Click to expand...

Encouraging others to commit acts of violence and endangering life to innocent people is disgusting and deserves punishment.

What Edwards did is totally different but also disgusting and deserves punishment.

I’d happily lock the social media cunts in jail aswell as Edwards but don’t get onboard the outrage because both are totally different circumstances and the jurisdiction has a far more understanding of the legal punishments requirements than I do.

You want a simple question answered when it’s not a black and white answer. Usual right wing trick. Hence all the usual Farage and co mob have come out with their pretend outrage downplaying a ‘Facebook post’ because of the punishment Edwards has got, how you are so easily gullible beats me.
 
LangleyBlue1970 said:
Both evil and sick? The threats were online ones, likely posted by people who wouldn’t even dare carry out said threat, just gobshites. The other is a now convicted nonce.

You need to get your morals straight, and fast.
Click to expand...

My morality would never downplay the evil shit being posted encouraging acts of violence, locations of migrant hotels to burn down. I’m far more comfortable knowing this is something we should come down hard on, yet to you it’s just ‘empty threats’ - totally downplaying the gravity of what those were encouraging.

I’ve already agreed I want Edwards in jail, if it was my choice and what he did is sick.

So I think it’s you that needs to get your morals straight.
 
BlueHammer85 said:
My morality would never downplay the evil shit being posted encouraging acts of violence, locations of migrant hotels to burn down. I’m far more comfortable knowing this is something we should come down hard on, yet to you it’s just ‘empty threats’ - totally downplaying the gravity of what those were encouraging.

I’ve already agreed I want Edwards in jail, if it was my choice and what he did is sick.

So I think it’s you that needs to get your morals straight.
Click to expand...
Course it is.

I’d fucking hate to be you
 
meltonblue said:
Pretty much this. I haven’t seen a case that didn’t fit into the sentencing guidelines, be it Edwards or the ones for social media posting.

People can argue the guidelines aren’t right (I’d agree with a lot of cases), they are being consistently applied though.
Click to expand...

most cases will fit into sentencing guidelines. But significantly those guidelines can be very wide. making an indecent image of a child max 10years. >>> outcome suspended sentence

inciting violence Max 7 years. >>>>outcome 4 years.

with a straight face tell me that those outcomes, whilst still within the "sentencing guidelines" , can even remotely be described as natural justice. and one offender has been treated far FAR more severely than the other.
 
Stephen230 said:
Because sentencing guidelines aren’t based on one huge line with ‘very bad’ at one end and ‘fuck all’ at the other. With every crime placed somewhere in between.

Each crime or group of crimes has their own set of sentencing guidelines, set by government.

If the general opinion is that Edward’s crimes have been dealt with too leniently. Then that isn’t down to the magistrate. Or Keir Starmer, as some Tory and ex Tory MPs are now ridiculously claiming.

It’s because nobody in government over the years since those guidelines were set, has been of a frame of mind to try and change them.
Click to expand...
But that's not true, as I pointed out in another post, the guidelines can have wide parameters, when a magistrate gives the lowest possible sentence they are at liberty to pass down, then it is totally down to weak magistrates. Perhaps the present government should change the guidelines and every offence have a mandatory MINIMUM sentence.
I can help them out with suitable suggestions. RAG supporter >>> MINIMUM sentence frontal lobotomy. that will do for a start!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.