Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Haringey looter pics issued by Met
Tags for Forum Posts: london troubles
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Hugh on
-
No, I get that - more a question of what's your suggested course of action following the troubles. In particular, what is your sense about whether/how those involved should be dealt with?
-
-
Permalink Reply by John McMullan on
-
Well the thing that worked for me was not being arrested and charged... I don't think too many people want to hear that though, least of all you oh poster of mug shots.
I shudder to think where I would have ended up now given the crimes I committed as a youngster if I'd had some of the people on HoL as neighbours and the age of criminal culpability had been less than 15, as it was where and when I grew up.
And don't try to expand the issue on here to get away from what you have done. It's all about posting the photographs at the request of the Met. Distasteful and slightly sycophantic.
-
Permalink Reply by StephenBln on
-
You have to give to them, the MET certainly did a great job of covering up it's short comings. And no doubt, will now get all the support it needs in building up resources.. In fact, anything it asks for..
The set of mug shots implied that these people acted collectively and I expect they will be judged for what was done collectively and not was done by their own hand.
I have to say I find the views of some the 'armchair jurors' on HOL rather alarming, as well as weak and vengeful. A judicial system should stand like a rock, handing down the correct tariffs for certain crimes.. I think it wobbled /is still wobbling in this case.
During the general election, HOL stood firm and decided to stand on the fence.. IMO, it should have done the same this time and not shown the photos.. there were plenty of other outlets for those..
Was HOL just playing to the press here..? And did it act in the best interests of Harringay.. ?
-
-
Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on
-
Interesting viewpoint, John.
As a social worker in the 1970s, I read Edwin Schur's book: Radical Non-Intervention: Rethinking the Delinquency Problem. It raised important questions - especially when considering some of the younger kids as they outgrew their adolescent behaviour. And they knew it - saying later how awful they'd been. As I recall, many of them were more likely to self-harm than harm other people or property.
I was also wondering what would have happened to Euan Blair or William Straw if they'd come to Police attention after 7 August this year.
-
-
Permalink Reply by GillianM on
-
I don't really understand these views. They are pictures we are told are of people who committed crimes. Should the police not bother pursuing them just cause there were a lot of them? And because a crime is "over" there is no point prosecuting those who did it?
-
Permalink Reply by Con on
-
I am sure any of these people pictured, who get caught, will be prosecuted no matter what our views are here. However I will not be participating in this because I don't believe justice is being served. Anyone person who is being dealt with by the judiciary should be processed free from public or government pressure. The judiciary should be independent but this is not the case.
Cases are being dealt with at all hours of the morning with solicitors, defendants, et al being half asleep. Bail being opposed and denied routinely. Harsh sentences given out arbitrarily for those who have pleaded guilty at the first opportunity.
The thing about the rioting is that it is easy to get caught up with the sentiment of the mob. Same goes for good old fashioned lynchings and public opinion.
-
-
While I disapprove strongly of the looting I agree with Con that the harsh sentencing is arbitrary, for example Nicolas Robinson, 23, of Borough, south-east London, carried out the 'opportunistic' theft at a Lidl supermarket {which had already been looted} in Brixton as he walked home from his girlfriend’s house." The judge said "Robinson’s previous good character and early plea of guilty to a non-dwelling burglary, as well as the low value of goods stolen, the fact he was in education, and his remorse, were in his favour." (The Telegraph)
Robinson was a student with no criminal record and previously 'good character'. He took bottled water to the value of £3.50 and was sentenced to 6 months prison. It was wrong of him to steal however this sentence is out of proportion to the crime particularly when compared to other crimes (e.g killing someone when driving dangerously). Robinson's six months prison sentence will cost the tax payer £20,000, wouldn't it have been better for the community, for Robinson and for the tax payer to get him and the others like him to work constructively for the community for that period?
Contrast this with the 'short selling' looters who during this same period took millions from national economies causing instability and chaos and robbing people of their savings. No doubt they will be given peerages.
-
-
Sure, I agree about the harsh sentencing. But this post was never about sentencing. It's about identifying those who committed crimes. What's the suggested course of action; do nothing?
-
-
There may be some reluctance to identify criminals when some of the crimes that have been coming up in the courts have been unreasonable.
(e.g. "a looter was warned he could be jailed for helping himself to an ice-cream cone during disturbances. Anderson Fernandes,22, appeared before magistrates Manchester charged with burglary after he took two scoops of coffee ice-cream and a cone from Patisserie Valerie in the city centre. He gave the cone away because he didn't like the flavour."* Or "Perry Sutcliffe-Keenan, 22, of Latchford, Warrington, used his Facebook account in the early hours of 9 August to design a web page entitled The Warrington Riots. The court was told it caused a wave of panic in the town. When he woke up the following morning with a hangover, he removed the page and apologised, saying it had been a joke. His message was distributed to 400 Facebook contacts, but no rioting broke out as a result."* Unbelievably stupid but did this really deserve a four year prison sentence for a young man of previously good behaviour. *Guardian.
-
-
So if OAE's incautious allusions on Feb 17 and Aug 9 to a certain bridge bannering outlet store lead to his going down for five years or so, I guess we'll have to blame Clive Carter for fingering him. Wonder if pressure on prison cells will mean Ally Pally becomes a concentration camp. Hope they wait till after Songs of Praise on Sept 25th.
-
-
You're done for OAE, bang to rights, five years at the very least. Shall we start a new thread on what books you'd like to take inside after the internet and thought police have called?
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
