Probably a slap on the wrist, told to be a good boy and do 20 hours community service. I can't understand why Judges don't take a more severe stance on sentencing. Like these African hooligans. It's said that if they are deported they could be murdered back in their own Country. Too bad, they should have thought about that before they started looting and robbing people. This only applies to those on Visas. Those born here should do 10 years. That should slow them down, especially after the first one is deported or locked up for 10 years.
Yuglamron said
03:43 PM Jan 8, 2018
>Quote> "What will the Courts Do?"
It brings to mind the answer the Qld Chief Justice De Jersey reportedly said a couple of years ago. This was after the public backlash after SOFT sentencing of violent criminals.
He said that the views of the PUBLIC have no bearing on the decisions reached by the Judiciary.
If the head of the Qld legal profession said this, what hope have we of sentencing reflecting the wishes of the general Public.
Can't sack them, they have given themselves Immunity from the wishes of the people who employ them.
Nobody is advocating Mob rule.
People are fed up with some sentences. One like some grub robbing, and then putting a 97 year old pensioner in hospital and being given 200 hours of Community service. The rape of a twelve month old baby requiring extensive surgery and only sentenced to 18 months jail time.
Just the expectation that the punishment reflects the severity of the crime.
-- Edited by Yuglamron on Monday 8th of January 2018 08:04:40 PM
brickies said
05:57 PM Jan 8, 2018
Mob Law doesn't count for anything , They follow the law has our government give them to follow .
RustyD said
11:29 PM Jan 8, 2018
I live opposite a cemetery where a some get to do community service. These people just sit and dont do a damned thing and there appears nothing the supervisors can do to get them to work.
rockylizard said
08:09 AM Jan 9, 2018
RustyD wrote:
I live opposite a cemetery where a some get to do community service. These people just sit and dont do a damned thing and there appears nothing the supervisors can do to get them to work.
Gday...
One would think it would be more productive to make representation to the authority responsible for organising and running the community work participants rather than tell it to a forum of old pharts who really can't make any difference.
I agree it needs to be remedied and is, in some way, indicative of our society these days - but there is nothing we can do on the forum.
A cuppla pics ... a short phone call ... an email ... just might get the supervisor's backside warmed ... that is the problem - not those on community work sentence.
Cheers - John
Dickodownunder said
09:04 AM Jan 9, 2018
rockylizard wrote:
RustyD wrote:
I live opposite a cemetery where a some get to do community service. These people just sit and dont do a damned thing and there appears nothing the supervisors can do to get them to work.
Gday...
One would think it would be more productive to make representation to the authority responsible for organising and running the community work participants rather than tell it to a forum of old pharts who really can't make any difference.
I agree it needs to be remedied and is, in some way, indicative of our society these days - but there is nothing we can do on the forum.
A cuppla pics ... a short phone call ... an email ... just might get the supervisor's backside warmed ... that is the problem - not those on community work sentence.
Cheers - John
I think what RustyD was getting at is that even when a sentence or penalty is handed down by the courts the perpetrator gets off very lightly in some cases.
An honest conversation with many police officers will reveal that our gaols are full and the courts are instructed to continue to give good behaviour bonds and community service orders by the governments that set these sentences.
This is cheaper for the governments than to built more gaols.
it is a high cost to society which in many cases the financial side is covered by insurance companies. Very few victims actually get any compensation for inconvenience etc. The lesser the crime the lesser the chance.
My question in the OP was what penalty will be issued to these thieves, and RustyD and others were only pointing out the flaws in our judicial system.
An email from a concerned member of the public would make very little difference to the next decision handed down by the courts.
If I were the owner of one of the cars broken into I would be pretty annoyed if the courts decision was to hand out a "paper tiger" decision.
What penalty do you think will be handed down????
-- Edited by Dickodownunder on Tuesday 9th of January 2018 09:14:37 AM
-- Edited by Dickodownunder on Tuesday 9th of January 2018 09:19:14 AM
rockylizard said
09:25 AM Jan 9, 2018
Dickodownunder wrote:
I think what RustyD was getting at is that even when a sentence or penalty is handed down by the courts the perpetrator gets off very lightly in some cases. ~~SNIP~~
An email from a concerned member of the public would make very little difference to the next decision handed down by the courts. ~~~SNIP
Gday...
Got both yours and Rusty's message Dicko ... but the problem highlighted by Rusty is not that the offenders have received a light sentence ... but rather that those employed in the cemetery to ensure the sentence set by the court is carried out are slack. It would be more productive to ensure the lax attitude of the person employed to enforce the sentence was reported so that remedial action could be taken and the intention of the sentence is carried out. The supervisor should either have his backside warmed or be shown the gate.
Whether the sentence of "community service" is valid or not is immaterial - none of us have any idea what crime those people in the cemetery have committed or why that sentence was applied.
I will concede quite readily that, in general, sentences handed out are invariably inconsistent, far too often do not reflect the severity of the crime and seem to be poorly administered - even those who end up in custodial sentence.
The problem is not, as one poster here stated, because of fault of the government of the day which 'limits' the severity of sentence the judiciary can or do hand down. If one does a modicum of research one will see that the greater majority of sentences handed down are well under the maximum sentences available to the judiciary to apply.
The solution? Difficult. Our society is built on the separation of powers, dividing the institutions of government into three branches: legislative, executive and judicial. The legislature makes the laws; the executive put the laws into operation; and the judiciary interprets the laws.
The problem is having the judiciary aware and accepting of the responsibility for their sentencing and to better reflect the expectations of the public and government.
Even those in 'power' have to be wary of their efforts to influence a change in the judiciary's sentencing.
I wonder what penalty will exist when these characters go to court.?
http://www.portlincolntimes.com.au/story/5154438/three-arrested-after-caravan-park-breaks/?cs=1500
Probably a slap on the wrist, told to be a good boy and do 20 hours community service. I can't understand why Judges don't take a more severe stance on sentencing. Like these African hooligans. It's said that if they are deported they could be murdered back in their own Country. Too bad, they should have thought about that before they started looting and robbing people. This only applies to those on Visas. Those born here should do 10 years. That should slow them down, especially after the first one is deported or locked up for 10 years.
>Quote> "What will the Courts Do?"
It brings to mind the answer the Qld Chief Justice De Jersey reportedly said a couple of years ago. This was after the public backlash after SOFT sentencing of violent criminals.
He said that the views of the PUBLIC have no bearing on the decisions reached by the Judiciary.
If the head of the Qld legal profession said this, what hope have we of sentencing reflecting the wishes of the general Public.
Can't sack them, they have given themselves Immunity from the wishes of the people who employ them.
Nobody is advocating Mob rule.
People are fed up with some sentences. One like some grub robbing, and then putting a 97 year old pensioner in hospital and being given 200 hours of Community service. The rape of a twelve month old baby requiring extensive surgery and only sentenced to 18 months jail time.
Just the expectation that the punishment reflects the severity of the crime.
-- Edited by Yuglamron on Monday 8th of January 2018 08:04:40 PM
Gday...
One would think it would be more productive to make representation to the authority responsible for organising and running the community work participants rather than tell it to a forum of old pharts who really can't make any difference.
I agree it needs to be remedied and is, in some way, indicative of our society these days - but there is nothing we can do on the forum.
A cuppla pics ... a short phone call ... an email ... just might get the supervisor's backside warmed ... that is the problem - not those on community work sentence.
Cheers - John
I think what RustyD was getting at is that even when a sentence or penalty is handed down by the courts the perpetrator gets off very lightly in some cases.
An honest conversation with many police officers will reveal that our gaols are full and the courts are instructed to continue to give good behaviour bonds and community service orders by the governments that set these sentences.
This is cheaper for the governments than to built more gaols.
it is a high cost to society which in many cases the financial side is covered by insurance companies. Very few victims actually get any compensation for inconvenience etc. The lesser the crime the lesser the chance.
My question in the OP was what penalty will be issued to these thieves, and RustyD and others were only pointing out the flaws in our judicial system.
An email from a concerned member of the public would make very little difference to the next decision handed down by the courts.
If I were the owner of one of the cars broken into I would be pretty annoyed if the courts decision was to hand out a "paper tiger" decision.
What penalty do you think will be handed down????
-- Edited by Dickodownunder on Tuesday 9th of January 2018 09:14:37 AM
-- Edited by Dickodownunder on Tuesday 9th of January 2018 09:19:14 AM
Gday...
Got both yours and Rusty's message Dicko ... but the problem highlighted by Rusty is not that the offenders have received a light sentence ... but rather that those employed in the cemetery to ensure the sentence set by the court is carried out are slack. It would be more productive to ensure the lax attitude of the person employed to enforce the sentence was reported so that remedial action could be taken and the intention of the sentence is carried out. The supervisor should either have his backside warmed or be shown the gate.
Whether the sentence of "community service" is valid or not is immaterial - none of us have any idea what crime those people in the cemetery have committed or why that sentence was applied.
I will concede quite readily that, in general, sentences handed out are invariably inconsistent, far too often do not reflect the severity of the crime and seem to be poorly administered - even those who end up in custodial sentence.
The problem is not, as one poster here stated, because of fault of the government of the day which 'limits' the severity of sentence the judiciary can or do hand down. If one does a modicum of research one will see that the greater majority of sentences handed down are well under the maximum sentences available to the judiciary to apply.
The solution? Difficult. Our society is built on the separation of powers, dividing the institutions of government into three branches: legislative, executive and judicial. The legislature makes the laws; the executive put the laws into operation; and the judiciary interprets the laws.
The problem is having the judiciary aware and accepting of the responsibility for their sentencing and to better reflect the expectations of the public and government.
Even those in 'power' have to be wary of their efforts to influence a change in the judiciary's sentencing.
Read all about it here
Cheers - John