lol cheers konabunny
Chat Forum
How the hell is this justice????
-
Posted 8 months ago #
-
lynchmob - Member
i guess the main thing that upsets me & the point im trying to get out is that you cant have 1 rule for 1 & another rule for others as then it upsets the general public as it is conflicting. conflicting information & people in power being allowed or getting hardly anything for crimes committed leads to upset & anger.
Like I say- he got a more severe sentence than typical specifically because of who he was and the fact that he was in power. If he'd been a company director defrauding a company, it's very unlikely he'd have served any time at all for such a low-value fraud.
Now whether or not that's justified is open to debate (I don't like to see people being "made an example of" personally) but that's a little beside the point- you can't say he's getting favourable treatment due to being part of the establishment, for being let out early from a sentence he only received because he's part of the establishment!
Posted 8 months ago # -
I'm a community nurse and I expect that I would get a longer sentence than that if I defrauded the tax payer out of £14k on my expenses.
And I've supported people with diagnosed learning disabilities who have recieved longer sentences for relatively minor crimes.
Posted 8 months ago # -
I doubt he got out directly because he is part of the establishment.
However his establishment links would have given him access to legal advice, lawyers and having the means to pay for them, that allowed his argument for release to be pushed through.
Its not the same as one law for one and another law for everyone else, but in practice it amounts to the same thing. Wealth and contacts gets you a much better application of the law than is available to the majority.
Posted 8 months ago # -
dangerousbeans - Member
I'm a community nurse and I expect that I would get a longer sentence than that if I defrauded the tax payer out of £14k on my expenses.
The stats say otherwise. Less than 1/4 of convicted fraudsters serve any jail time at all, and that 1/4 is mostly for higher values or otherwise more serious cases (ie, where the fraud has caused considerable harm to the victim). In the minority of cases where a custodial sentence is given, the average is around 9 months. Abuse of a position of trust is an aggravating factor
There's also the legitimate quesiton of intent and gain- his defence (that he was still left out of pocket on expenses, and that the fraudulent claims were intended to offset that rather than to profit) was thrown out on principle so his claims were never tested, but it's certainly plausible that he made no gain. (and this should have been taken into account in the sentencing, but the suggestion is that it wasn't)
Posted 8 months ago # -
Did he appeal the sentence?
Posted 8 months ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
