L’uomo iraniano che ha violentato la ragazza, 13 anni, in un vicolo è incarcerato per soli sette anni – perché il giudice non pensava di essere una “persona pericolosa”
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14973083/amp/Iranian-man-raped-girl-13-alleyway-jailed-just-SEVEN-years-judge-didnt-think-dangerous-person.html
di pppppppppppppppppd
10 commenti
[removed]
Genuinely how does sentencing even work in this country?
If he truly wasn’t a dangerous person, he wouldn’t have been raping people in alleys…
Nothing says not being dangerous like raping a child.
7 years? Out in 5? British justice at its finest
It’s funny that I can’t find mention of the judges comments in any other article. I wonder if the Daily Mail are making stuff up again.
Nice cosy room, with full board and TV for 7 years. It’s a win/win for an asylum seeker
Now that he knows it’s wrong he’s much less likely to do it.
Lets get this straight:
Judge with years of experience of rape cases, lives with this case for a long period, reads psychiatric and behavioural reports, hears lengthy arguments both for and against this guy and comes to this conclusion.
Daily Mail reporter who only read a transcript of the final verdict, has zero legal knowledge, zero criminal knowledge, zero psychological knowledge decides they know better than the judge.
Suddenly everyone is an expert despite knowing fuck all about this case.
Its just rage bait. Dont fall for it.
People are jumping on this, especially right wing politicians, based on legal terms which have quite specific meanings, but used in a layman’s sense.
He is clearly a dangerous person as the seven year sentence indicates. We can argue about whether that’s enough but it’s in line with sentencing guidelines. A judge can pass an extended term, beyond guidelines if the defendant is considered especially dangerous for that particular category of crime. This man did not reach that high threshold for a sentence beyond guidelines.
Similarly whether the victim suffered “severe psychological trauma”. Again, this allows a sentence above guidelines, and it seems the evidence wasn’t there to justify that.
Personally, I think guidelines need rewriting – 7 years is not long enough for raping a 13 year old. But this is a case of a newspaper and opportunist politicians pillorying a judge who has acted correctly according to the parameters they are given.
Chris Phelp was a cabinet minister not long ago – he didn’t care enough to amend those guidelines when in power.
when will sexual crimes be taken seriously in this country??