|
16 Sep
5:03pm, 16 Sep 2024
17,814 posts
|
jda
My understanding is that he asked for images that looked "young" but explicitly specified that nothing illegal was to be sent.
I may have misunderstood something about it, but that's what the coverage seems to say. I didn't pore over every detail.
|
|
16 Sep
5:05pm, 16 Sep 2024
4,512 posts
|
Cheg
Yeah I’d like to see the details. I’d seen on that great source that is X that he had paid for it.
I wouldn’t want to go to jail because some ‘mate’ sent me something I didn’t want to receive.
If you did receive something like that unsolicited. You would expect the person to report it.
|
|
16 Sep
5:12pm, 16 Sep 2024
6,458 posts
|
paulcook
You’re right G but I think given this case seems to be within the right parameters and sentencing guidelines, etc, means if it feels wrong then the guidelines themselves are wrong rather than people involved in this case.
I see a lot of criticism elsewhere comparing this to either (JSO) peaceful protest or (right-wing rioting) “hurty words”.
|
|
16 Sep
5:18pm, 16 Sep 2024
29,286 posts
|
richmac
How do people think this is comparable to either of those 2 things ?
Although I'm guessing it's people with an agenda advancing that argument
|
|
16 Sep
5:26pm, 16 Sep 2024
6,459 posts
|
paulcook
Probably.
#twotierkier etc crops up a lot on some of those arguments. Put it that way.
|
|
16 Sep
5:29pm, 16 Sep 2024
29,287 posts
|
richmac
Ahhhh victimhood
|
|
16 Sep
5:53pm, 16 Sep 2024
50,956 posts
|
HappyG(rrr)
Hmm, well I'm slightly surprised at all the defenders he has in here.
Yes, I understand it's the sentencing guidelines that are at fault, so my beef is that the government should make the sentencing stricter.
No, I don't think some of the mitigations that the magistrate cited (I've just heard a news summary) such as remorse, his own suffering because he is a public figure, or the fact that he doesn't pose any additional threat should have affected whether he was given custody.
Yes, I think he has benefited from being famous and has been treated more leniently because a. his public status was specifically taken into account in his sentence being suspended b. he can live very comfortably away from public view and without working, because of the millions he has been paid out of our public TV licence fee and c. there was absolutely no defence of ignorance or accident and his very high powered lawyers will have spun every bit of that that they possibly could, I'm sure.
Hmm.
|
|
16 Sep
5:59pm, 16 Sep 2024
4,513 posts
|
Cheg
I’d like to have seen him go to prison. I haven’t read enough to know whether they have gone easy on him.
|
|
16 Sep
6:09pm, 16 Sep 2024
6,461 posts
|
paulcook
I think a suspended sentence still equals a prison sentence, just (sorry, couldn't think of better word) with immediate freedom and different stipulations, like in this example his 40-day programme he has to complete. I don't think the difference between suspended or not is deemed as going easy in the eyes of the law.
Plus the prisons are full.
|
|
16 Sep
6:18pm, 16 Sep 2024
4,514 posts
|
Cheg
Suspended sentence doesn’t equal a prison sentence. It’s a yellow card. Don’t do it again.
|
Fantasy General Election
Jul 2024
