Vicky Pryce. A disgrace

Not comparable, Clive. That is a completely separate topic.

8 months, or more, deserved for both of them. This I would have thought is one of the more black and white cases and sentencings.
 
Who is a bigger menace to society? Someone whos fiddled their speeding points (and who hasnt speeded?) or someone who turns over some old dears house and (as i have seen) wrecks their life?

One gets 8 months and the other a slap on wrist from some twat who "blamesitonsociety"

Burglary should be a mandatory sentence from the off.

Both sentences are wildly wrong. He treated her disgracefully (by all accounts) and whilst taht shouldnt come into it, this is sadistic sentencing on a woman who has been through quite enough

Not since that stomach churning treatment of the Dowler family by the lawyer (and i sometimes think i would have taken 8 months to administer a heavy kicking of that *******) in the Levi Bellfield case has a court action been so disgusting IMO
 
Last edited:
I don't disagree with you. These 2 clowns lying their way through this whole sorry mess means, for me, they deserve what they get.

It is the sentencing for burglars that is the issue, not these 2.
 
I think perverting the course of justice deserves heavy sentencing. We need to send out a strong message otherwise the court system will collapse. I reckon she got off lightly.
 
Don't have a problem with the 8 months (they'll both be out in 4 , on the presumption of 'good behaviour') but am surprised both got the same; Huhne deserving of more in my opinion, or if you believe the 8 months is excessive, more than Pryce, anyway

They are patently not a danger to the public so whether they should be locked up, at considerable expense to the taxpayer, is a moot point but that's really another debate

Perverting the course of justice is, quite correctly, regarded as a serious offence and as the law stands demands a custodial sentence, be it for the superficially inconsequential transfer of a speeding offence or something more consequential

Comparison with sentences handed out to burglars isn't very helpful: there is certainly much wrong with those, but much right with this

The law isn't always an ass
 
Bollocks drone frankly

"another debate"? Since when? It's the exact point of the thread

Comparisons with burglars sentences are absolutely spot on. Isn't helpful to who? Those that ask the very rational question that burglers are not jailed because the "jails are full" and yet ...
 
Hamm said:
I don't disagree with you. These 2 clowns lying their way through this whole sorry mess means, for me, they deserve what they get.

It is the sentencing for burglars that is the issue, not these 2.
Click to expand...

Agree with this, don't have a problem with this sentencing, although possibly he should have got longer than her.
I do have a problem with burglars, rapists etc getting slaps on the wrist.
 
Burglars largely get significant custodial sentences - rapists always do - indeed sentencing for rape is much more punitive than it was in the 1960s and 1970s.

She was an idiot - had she pleaded rather than run her rather implausible defence she would almost certainly have avoided a custodial sentence . He I think is pretty fortunate not to have received 12-18 months .

Perverting the course of justice is a very serious crime and will attract an element of deterrence . It strikes at the heart of the system of criminal justice . The fact that speeding is not considered anything other than a minor offence is one thing but driving disqualification has a particular purpose - to keep unsafe drivers off the road and to make them consider their driving .

Huhne was plainly a pretty careless driver - he got another 3 points about a week later but consider for example a case when A takes B's 3 points and he then with 9 points runs someone over in his next speeding escapade .
 
So the figures released by the ministry of justice to parliament are incorrect then? As detailed in link above and no doubt elsehwere. Half of burglers get sent to prison. Either that story is a complete lie or it isn't. Or you are completely wrong

On the other point of unsafe drivers I think 4 speeding tickets over 3 years is far from proving unsafe. Who the hell sticks to70 on motorways anyway? I do actually believe limit should be lower than 30 for very narrow built up areas but frankly a lot of cameras are set up as a revenue generators and little more. A couple near me are for 40 mph on a completely safe straight dual carriageway. Being in London I'm not that reliant on the motor but back myself as a safe driver ( never a scrape in 30 years ) stuck on 9 points and a flash away from a ban had me slamming on the anchors and staring at the roadside for 3 fcking years
 
clivex said:
So the figures released by the ministry of justice to parliament are incorrect then? As detailed in link above and no doubt elsehwere. Half of burglers get sent to prison. Either that story is a complete lie or it isn't. Or you are completely wrong

On the other point of unsafe drivers I think 4 speeding tickets over 3 years is far from proving unsafe. Who the hell sticks to70 on motorways anyway? I do actually believe limit should be lower than 30 for very narrow built up areas but frankly a lot of cameras are set up as a revenue generators and little more. A couple near me are for 40 mph on a completely safe straight dual carriageway. Being in London I'm not that reliant on the motor but back myself as a safe driver ( never a scrape in 30 years ) stuck on 9 points and a flash away from a ban had me slamming on the anchors and staring at the roadside for 3 fcking years
Click to expand...

With the very greatest of respect if you seriously think the Daily Mail is a source of reliable and complete information .... :blink:

I suggest you go to the Ministry of Justice website and look up the raw data . For example , do those stats include offences that have been taken into consideration? Do they include young offenders for whom the sentencing regime is entirely different ? What percentage is of burglary of residential premises ?

In practice , it is extremely rare for an adult house burglar who is convicted not to go to prison .

Judges do sometimes get it wrong - and if they do err on the side of leniency outside the SEntencing Guidelines which are drafted not only by judges but with input from the public to then the Attorney General can refer those sentences to the Court of Appeal . The problem is , that sentencing is a far more difficult and nuanced exercise than the Daily Mail or most of the public realise .
 
Last edited:
With respect to the legal people here, lectures from plod and lawyers yesterday about lying would have made many choke.

Great piece in the times today by the ever excellent rachel sylvester. Upsetting the judiciary is worse than the "crime" itself is the theme and to my mind that's spot on.
 
Last edited:
harry said:
On a side issue....she's not very hot is she?
Click to expand...

naughty boy





no:)

think the sentence was ok...but burglary isn't treated with the seriousness it deserves..for those that get burgled..it can dramatically affect their lives..should be a minimum 2 year sentence...if they run out of prisons..then maybe its time we had some prison ships...there are plenty of old boats out there;)
 
Last edited:
On The Bridle said:
I think he should return the compliment and do the other 4 months for her.
Click to expand...

Class.. :lol:

However, while I agree it was a crime, should be punished etc etc, do I think it merits wasting taxpayer's money even further by generating a custodial sentence? No, I don't. Criminal record and a serious, serious amount of community service doing something useful, physical hard graft and, hopefully, unpleasant would have been my idea of just punishment. Plus a lifetime driving ban to boot.

There must be thousands of projects up and down the country that could do with a couple of extra pairs of hands and, as long as they were well-supervised so they don't get to bunk off or call in 'sick' it would be better than dossing around in an open prison doing the occasional bit of work.
 
I'll say one thing for U.K. justice -- and is well illustrated in this particular case -- the U.K. judicial system is transparent, unambiguous, and dispenses justice without fear or favour to rich and poor alike.

Contrast this with the rotten-to-the-core system in the country in which I live.
Here in the R.O.I., only yesterday it was revealed that ten T.D.'s ( MP's) and Ministers had licence penalty points erased by the Gardai by request.
This is nothing less than a perverting of the course of justice by so-called legislators -- and if the same thing came to light in the U.K., those ten TD's would be doing porridge for a couple of months.
But over here we just "tut-tut" and move on. :mad:
 
Hamm said:
I don't disagree with you. These 2 clowns lying their way through this whole sorry mess means, for me, they deserve what they get.

It is the sentencing for burglars that is the issue, not these 2.
Click to expand...

Agree with every word of this. The burglar's sentence is clearly wrong, but I'm pleased these two idiots are going to prison. Especially her - I'd say whoever advised her she'd get off claiming marital coercion is feeling pretty stupid too.
 
Back
Top