News - Facebook disorder inciters get four years

[HEXUS]

The justice system is sending out some pretty strong messages.

Read more.

[Gordy]

Ain't karma a b*tch.

[crossy]

the justice system wants to hand out some strong sentences pour encourager les autres.

Pedant time - shouldn't that be "pour décourager les autres"? But hey, what do I know - my last encounter with French was in high school - which was a long, long, long time ago.

One thing I'm not clear on - did these two idiots actually arrange any of the rioting or, like the equally brain dead moron locally, (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...-fife-14543193), were they just trying to climb aboard a train that was already rolling?

If they were arranging, then four years seems harsh, but probably justified (as ScottB says - as an example to others so inclined). If, on the other hand, they were just sucked in to the frenzy, then the sentence is not so easy to justify - kind of like the 4 month jail for the single mother who got left a pair of stolen shorts by her flatmate while she was asleep. But that's just my opinion ...

[Badbonji]

Owned. I am not sure how the rioting was supposed to help anything anyway, considering all they did was smash their own shops...

[Roobubba]

Owned. I am not sure how the rioting was supposed to help anything anyway, considering all they did was smash their own shops...

Well, not their own shops, but shops in their communities. No, they vandalised and stole from others who live near them.

So these two weren't apparently successful in their attempts to incite riots, but what does that matter? Whether other people went along with what they were suggesting or not doesn't change what they did.

It's a harsh punishment, but sadly it costs us, the taxpayers, yet again. I want to see all of those found guilty of wrongdoing during these riots made to work to pay off their debt to society, not lumber us with yet more bills...

Roo

[oolon]

At first I thought, that is a bit harsh, however the more i think about it the more i agree with the judge. These people may have thought it was a joke, and no one answered their call. The riots however are not a matter to be joked about many have lost there homes, jobs and businesses. The point was that this diverted police resources at a time they were most at need. Making it far worse than "just" being part of the crowd.

The thing about the mother with the stolen shoes is... at the least she knowingly accepted stolen goods and did not report her flat mate for thief, harbouring a criminal, at the worse she actually stole them herself and the "flat mate" thing is at attempt to get off with a lighter sentence. It a tricky call for a Judge, I am glad I don't have to make such decisions.

[Scott B]

Pedant time - shouldn't that be "pour décourager les autres"? But hey, what do I know - my last encounter with French was in high school - which was a long, long, long time ago.

One thing I'm not clear on - did these two idiots actually arrange any of the rioting or, like the equally brain dead moron locally, (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...-fife-14543193), were they just trying to climb aboard a train that was already rolling?

If they were arranging, then four years seems harsh, but probably justified (as ScottB says - as an example to others so inclined). If, on the other hand, they were just sucked in to the frenzy, then the sentence is not so easy to justify - kind of like the 4 month jail for the single mother who got left a pair of stolen shorts by her flatmate while she was asleep. But that's just my opinion ...

Not according to Voltaire: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Minorca. The translation of the passage the phrase it's derived from goes: "In this country, it is wise to kill an admiral from time to time to encourage the others."

[Jimbo75]

Even if they were only "joking", they deserve time for their stupidity. Stupidity should be a crime in all instances anyway.

Sadly they'll do nowhere near 4 years.

[[GSV]Trig]

Either way they presented themselves as an easy reward for a legal system desperate to show it's not entirely impotent.

Impotent, imcompetent, whats one without the other....

[Saracen]

I've only read the details in brief, but it seems to me that the offence was trying to organise, and provoke, a riot. That it failed is not the point. It's like conspiracy to murder - if you set out, with others, and actively plan and prepare for a murder, it's a serious offence whether you actually physically act or not, let alone succeed.

In my opinion, the sentence is not unreasonable, given the likely results, as seen elsewhere, had they succeeded, and a riot ensued at their behest.

Sadly, I agree with those that say they'll never serve anything like that amount. First, they'll no doubt the about about half-way through, but second, this sentence is very likely to go to appeal, and the result there is unpredictable, but if the actually do more than 12 months inside, I'll be surprised .... and maybe shocked.

[kingpotnoodle]

The intention and wish is there whether you succeed or not, same principle as attempted murder - just because you failed doesn't make you innocent.

They are being punished for attempting to start a riot, not for the consequences of any riot. Had they started and participated in one they could have expected stiffer sentences as they would have committed more crimes, particularly if people had been injured or died... I would argue if you start a riot in which someone dies you are guilty of incitement to murder.

4 years is adequate, they'll be out in 2 if they behave anyway.

We don't punish people harshly enough, that's why they think it's OK to do this stupid **** in the first place, I would be happy to see the government spend more on criminal justice, if it reduces crime in the long run then it's going to pay for itself. These are kids, they have no backbone, if there were real consequences to their actions, visible consequences, they wouldn't keep it up - see how they run when the police charge? As soon as the going gets tough the chavs run like the cowardly opportunist scum they are.

[CWH]

Four years, when the maximum sentence is ten, doesn't see too harsh to me.

What I don't understand, what was their mind-set putting something like this up on a public facing site. Did they not think that it would be noticed?

[jim]

Four years, when the maximum sentence is ten, doesn't see too harsh to me.

What I don't understand, what was their mind-set putting something like this up on a public facing site. Did they not think that it would be noticed?

They probably thought nothing would come of it.

The main reason why I think the sentences are excellent.

[TheAnimus]

"did they ever give anyone the nobel price for attempted chemistry"?

[mcmiller]

Are they too harsh or are the judges normally to lenient?

[Noli]

The intention and wish is there whether you succeed or not, same principle as attempted murder - just because you failed doesn't make you innocent.

They are being punished for attempting to start a riot, not for the consequences of any riot. Had they started and participated in one they could have expected stiffer sentences as they would have committed more crimes, particularly if people had been injured or died... I would argue if you start a riot in which someone dies you are guilty of incitement to murder.

4 years is adequate, they'll be out in 2 if they behave anyway.

We don't punish people harshly enough, that's why they think it's OK to do this stupid **** in the first place, I would be happy to see the government spend more on criminal justice, if it reduces crime in the long run then it's going to pay for itself. These are kids, they have no backbone, if there were real consequences to their actions, visible consequences, they wouldn't keep it up - see how they run when the police charge? As soon as the going gets tough the chavs run like the cowardly opportunist scum they are.

This.