By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Mike Amesbury jail sentence on 12:12 - Feb 27 by JACKMANANDBOY
Those who talk about a two tier justice system seem to be correct.
It does make me wonder what is happening when Amesbury gets out of jail after 3 days for knocking seven bells out of some poor sap, while a middle-aged nursery worker got 40% of 31 months for unwisely posting on social media that people could do horrible things to asylum seekers "for all I care".
Edit. N.B. Amesbury's sentence is still 10 weeks but suspended for two years, not as the post above said a two year suspended sentence.
[Post edited 27 Feb 13:51]
0
Mike Amesbury jail sentence on 14:14 - Feb 27 with 661 views
Mike Amesbury jail sentence on 14:18 - Feb 27 by Whiterockin
Can the person attacked bring a civil case. It wouldn't take long to crowd fund the costs if it was possible.
Not really my field, but as far as I can see there are two options for a victim who feels the sentence was too lenient, or that the outcome has not compensated for the harm done..
1. Unduly Lenient Sentence Scheme. “Under the extended scheme, victims will be given the power to challenge the sentences of a wider range of crimes in circumstances where they, or the public (those unconnected to the case), believe a punishment to be too lenient. (…) The ULS scheme permits prosecutors, victims, their families and the public to make an application to the Attorney General to review a sentence that they believe to be too low. Only one request need be lodged, which must be done within 28 days of the court hearing taking place.”
2. Civil case. Certainly possible but centres on a claim for compensation for harm done (whether physical or psychological) and so is about monetary damages rather than a harsher sentence. There are a few options here:
The judge who initially sentenced Amesbury was a deputy district judge and junior to the judge who reviewed the sentence today. There’s no doubt Amesbury deserved a stretch, but I was surprised given the fact we’re releasing people early he didn’t get a suspended sentence.
There’s judge hearing the case today was sitting with two magistrates at Crown Court and he also ordered Amesbury to carry out 200 hours of unpaid work. Amesbury must also undertake an alcohol monitoring programme, go on an anger management course, and carry out 20 days of rehabilitation work.
Was Amesbury out of order, absolutely. Is he a danger to the wider society, if he’s never been in trouble before and this is a 1 off I’d argue he isn’t, especially given the rehabilitative measures in the sentence.
Does Amesbury deserve to lose his job - absolutely. Is he fit to be an MP, in my opinion the answer is noand he’s not the only one.
I hope the citizens in his constituency boot him out at the first available opportunity.
0
Mike Amesbury jail sentence on 19:14 - Feb 27 with 475 views
Mike Amesbury jail sentence on 19:07 - Feb 27 by majorraglan
The judge who initially sentenced Amesbury was a deputy district judge and junior to the judge who reviewed the sentence today. There’s no doubt Amesbury deserved a stretch, but I was surprised given the fact we’re releasing people early he didn’t get a suspended sentence.
There’s judge hearing the case today was sitting with two magistrates at Crown Court and he also ordered Amesbury to carry out 200 hours of unpaid work. Amesbury must also undertake an alcohol monitoring programme, go on an anger management course, and carry out 20 days of rehabilitation work.
Was Amesbury out of order, absolutely. Is he a danger to the wider society, if he’s never been in trouble before and this is a 1 off I’d argue he isn’t, especially given the rehabilitative measures in the sentence.
Does Amesbury deserve to lose his job - absolutely. Is he fit to be an MP, in my opinion the answer is noand he’s not the only one.
I hope the citizens in his constituency boot him out at the first available opportunity.
That's different to your opening post, the message sent out has now been silenced.
He hasn't had the decency to resign, so as you say hopefully his constituents will kick him out
You give it out, you take it back it`s all part of the game
Mike Amesbury jail sentence on 17:04 - Feb 27 by AnotherJohn
Not really my field, but as far as I can see there are two options for a victim who feels the sentence was too lenient, or that the outcome has not compensated for the harm done..
1. Unduly Lenient Sentence Scheme. “Under the extended scheme, victims will be given the power to challenge the sentences of a wider range of crimes in circumstances where they, or the public (those unconnected to the case), believe a punishment to be too lenient. (…) The ULS scheme permits prosecutors, victims, their families and the public to make an application to the Attorney General to review a sentence that they believe to be too low. Only one request need be lodged, which must be done within 28 days of the court hearing taking place.”
2. Civil case. Certainly possible but centres on a claim for compensation for harm done (whether physical or psychological) and so is about monetary damages rather than a harsher sentence. There are a few options here:
Mike Amesbury jail sentence on 13:05 - Feb 27 by raynor94
What is the point of the original sentence, they have now found a judge more to their liking.
It really is a two tier system, imagine if one of us did that in Wind street!
While it’s reasonable to question the length of these sentences I don’t think it can be called two tier.
If there’s evidence of the same crime, in the same contest, committed by people with the same behavioural backgrounds having different sentences because of who the are then that would be two tier. It would also be two tier if sentencing guidelines were ignored. I’ve not seen any of that.
Otherwise it’s just feeling that sentences don’t always fit the crimes
0
Mike Amesbury jail sentence on 23:16 - Feb 27 with 290 views
Gross misconduct , a sacking offence in any line of work , Politician or shelf stacker . Instant dismissal if proven otherwise . no grey areas or fancy lawyer waffle .
He was caught on CCTV assaulting a bloke while he was peed up , he had a bit of earache off the guy , live with it mate , we all have to tolerate abuse in many essential roles .
A Politician with one too many sherberts kicking off at 3 am in the Street with people filming on their phones as it happens .
Get a grip mush , just walk away and do not react .
0
Mike Amesbury jail sentence on 06:33 - Feb 28 with 194 views
The discussion of the issue of possible two-tier justice made me think of the case of Ricky Jones, which some thought might be an revealing point of comparison with the social media sentences. After Jones was charged with encouraging violent disorder last August, a date in January 2025 was set for a Crown Court trial. We cannot discuss the substance of the case in advance of that trial, but can take note of progress towards it. Initially, Jones was remanded in custody, but was released on bail after a short period in prison. Now the trial date has been put back to August 11th this year after an application by the defence was agreed by the judge.
Jaswant Narwal, chief crown prosecutor for CPS London North, is quoted in the press as saying: "It i s extremely important that there should be no reporting, commentary, or sharing of information online which could in any way prejudice these proceedings.” I have no comment on Jones' guilt or innocence, but do think that the contrast between a 7 months delay and "swift justice" in the social media cases provides ammunition to the "two tier" side of the argument.
0
Mike Amesbury jail sentence on 07:28 - Feb 28 with 177 views
Mike Amesbury jail sentence on 06:33 - Feb 28 by AnotherJohn
The discussion of the issue of possible two-tier justice made me think of the case of Ricky Jones, which some thought might be an revealing point of comparison with the social media sentences. After Jones was charged with encouraging violent disorder last August, a date in January 2025 was set for a Crown Court trial. We cannot discuss the substance of the case in advance of that trial, but can take note of progress towards it. Initially, Jones was remanded in custody, but was released on bail after a short period in prison. Now the trial date has been put back to August 11th this year after an application by the defence was agreed by the judge.
Jaswant Narwal, chief crown prosecutor for CPS London North, is quoted in the press as saying: "It i s extremely important that there should be no reporting, commentary, or sharing of information online which could in any way prejudice these proceedings.” I have no comment on Jones' guilt or innocence, but do think that the contrast between a 7 months delay and "swift justice" in the social media cases provides ammunition to the "two tier" side of the argument.
Not my area of expertise but my understanding is that the difference between this case and the ‘swift’ ones is the not guilty plea.
This may well be two tier in that some can afford to mount a defence where others can’t, but sadly that’s not a thing.
0
Mike Amesbury jail sentence on 09:27 - Feb 28 with 99 views
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
