But no, in all seriousness, how the fuck can this be justice? I mean 100 victims of ANYTHING seems like this person can’t be trusted to be around other human beings. I think chemical (or even physical) castration is a must here.
I don’t typically support vigilantism (IRL, fantasy is cool), but 100 brother/fathers/friends of the victims each getting one punch would probably end this problem…
(Off-topic pedantry, but …)
You do realise that for a segment of the US population (but surely nobody here at BB) that quote means to them that you DON’T have the faintest clue? I could care less, butso I thought I’d point it out.
Yes, I did, and you should be publicly chastised for that kind of pretzel logic. You made a boo boo, just admit it and move on.
“Nick Hardwick said hearing the decision must have been “horrible” for the women but the board was “confident” 60-year-old Worboys would not reoffend.”
Unless the board members are willing to commit seppuku if they are wrong in order to atone for their failure, I think his opinion is meaningless.
Let him keep this guy in his home if he is that harmless now or let him drive his daughters around.
Parole Boards need to be held responsible for their decisions. Failing to protect the public is a serious breach of honor and lack of responsibility for decisions made leads to careless and costly errors.
I hold this “wholesale rate” of sentencing a person where they get a major discount for multiple serious offenses to be absurd, offensive and downright immoral.
Rape six women get at least six times the sentence for raping one. I am far less interested in reforming such people than I am in protecting society from predators. Since we seem to lack the moral fortitude to execute the3se animals (and I do not care a fig if they are “mentally challenged”, socially disadvantaged or whatever the hell excuse is popular this week), let’s make sure women do not need to fear the night or strange men as much by keeping this sort where they cannot harm others.
That is NOT what happened here (and tends not to happen here, as opposed to USA). (Possibly Enkita would have a more authoritative view but perhaps understandably may not wish to revisit it). He did NOT get a sentence"discount" - it was an indeterminate sentence (re-read the post), which means, in effect, “could be forever”. He got an early release because apparently he convinced the parole board he was not a threat to society any more, which is pretty much the ONLY way to get released from an indeterminate sentence, AFAIUI. Again, no idea if he is a threat or not, no idea what his case for release consisted of, and it does not pass MY smell test by a very long way, but please do not assume circumstances that do not apply.
ETA
In the context above, I can only assume you mean “rapists” and are advocating “life means life” for all convicted of rape? I think we can see where you are coming from (given “moral fortitude to execute” and “mentally challenged … or whatever excuse is popular this week”, but thankfully the legal system is capable of a little more nuance than the “flog 'em and hang 'em” brigade would prefer. In Warboys case there may an argument for flogging or throwing away the key, but most find this kind of generalised knee-jerk ‘one size fits all’ approach less desirable. I’m sure Paul Dacre approves of your position, though, all the same.)
Another consideration is that he wasn’t convicted of more than 100 attacks; in 2009 it was 19 counts.
More victims have come forward since, and I sincerely hope many of those cases result in further prosecutions, but the idea that he served a month for each attack he was charged with is bogus.
I suspect the parole board weren’t allowed to take the extra allegations into account, either, ‘just’ the 19 that were proven in court.
What does your offering the opinion that these rapes do not constitute serious injury have to do with your legal system? I couldn’t care less what your legal system is, its taxonomy of crimes, or at what level a crime is considered violent. I take offense to the notion that rape isn’t a serious injury.
I think Enkita’s point was that this is how the legal system classifies it, NOT that it’s Enkita’s own opinion.
And just for the record, not that it exonerates this slimeball one bit, he was charged (i.e. what the legal system - or the prosecutors, at least - classified it as) with 19 offences including one rape. The rest (I assume) were some form of common assault or sexual assault. He drugged women and asaulted them. From one perspective it matters not a jot - he’s a serial predator and it defies credibility that he could be safe to release at this point. From another, what the legal system concludes does matter.
What’s worst is that the public has no right to know anything about the level of the bar he had to get over to convince a parole board he was not a danger, and how he managed to get over it. Professor Nick Hardwick (head of parole service) again said on another BBC interview tonight that he wanted to get the rule about ‘no public discussion of parole board workings’ relaxed, but right now he has zero choice - inevitably leading to furore in outlier cases such as this.
It’s not intended to “apply” in any meaningful legal sense: it’s a rhetorical statement made by the (British) lawyer to illustrate how long the rapist got jailed for each of 100 or so victims, most of which he was never charged for assaulting in the first place.
So, please consider stuffing your fussy oneupmanship over “this is not the US” up your arse.
he didn’t kill or seriously injure his victims.
Ah yes, good to see the days of the gentleman rapist are not over.
All rapists seriously injure their victims, even in the view of the flawed British criminal justice system. This is why a synonym for rape is “sexual assault”, as in a specific type of assault. If a rapist also kills his victim or beats his victim bloody he gets charged separately for those crimes in addition to sexual assault. There is no logic to the parole board’s decision to release this dangerous serial predator.
Considering how many years it took to get him in jail in the first place this must be a real slap in the face to the women who reported him. They were laughed at, ignored, and lied to for years because police couldn’t believe that a cab driver would dare to carry alcohol in his cab, much less drugs. If this doesn’t display society’s lack of value of women I don’t know what would.
Maybe the government could apologize to him for the inconvenience.
The perpetration of violence is not justice any more than a victim would believe a single punch would serve as retribution for their rape.
While I may concede the perpetuation of violence may not be justice, the cumulative effect of 100 punches/strikes would be retribution and most likely end in death.
Certainly 5 years in prison is not justice either.
Seems I was mistaken. There were other alleged rapes but prosecutors already had enough evidence to obtain a substantial sentence, I believe. There may have been timing and evidence issues.
No, they only do that for gay men… /s
Perhaps so, but maybe he wasn’t clear on that point in the OP?
I am not responsible for your lack of intellectual rigor.
Do you think, just maybe, the problem isn’t everyone else, it might be that the way you stated your point is unclear?
I’m certainly prepared to entertain it. It has made me realise that in dealing with left-pondians I do have to rethink my tendency to express myself in a somewhat English way, and in any case I do find myself asking myself quite often whether I should stick to more UK-based social media.
Edit - no, actually, that’s right. It’s time to leave.
