Nicola Sturgeon has jacked

viv_andersons_nana said:
Your link literally says:

“The guidance gives more detail on how the assessment of a young person's maturity has a bearing on culpability, and gives more clarity on how the impact on victims is to be taken in account.

It suggests factors common to many young people who commit offences, such as childhood trauma, should be considered.

But it makes it clear that the full range of sentencing options will remain open to courts when sentencing a young person.”
Click to expand...

I'm aware what it says.

Without that guideline, a child rapist would not have had community service considered as acceptable justice for what he did just because he was under 25.

You could say it's down to the judge in question making the decision, but it's still a consequence of the guideline.
 
TeaCider said:
Now people are getting community service for repugnant crimes.
Click to expand...

Yeah I agree that is dreadful, especially the case in your first link where it was a child rapist. Hard to understand why a judge would decide that's a case to use these guidelines on.

TeaCider said:
A body set up by the SNP, and the Scottish government surely decides whether the recommendation would be accepted in to law or not.
Click to expand...

Maybe you're right about that. 🤷‍♂️ I honestly don't know. Just making the point that it says its an independent body.
 
TeaCider said:
and the Scottish government surely decides whether the recommendation would be accepted in to law or not.
They decided that it was fine.
Click to expand...

For info, wiki says the Scottish Sentencing Council submits guidelines to the 'High Court of Justiciary' and they are the ones that decide to approve them.
 
TeaCider said:
I'm aware what it says.

Without that guideline, a child rapist would not have had community service considered as acceptable justice for what he did just because he was under 25.

You could say it's down to the judge in question making the decision, but it's still a consequence of the guideline.
Click to expand...
My point is that just because one person has used what is only actually guidance to issue someone with something that looks like an incredibly lenient sentence doesn’t mean that guidance is bad in and of itself. Or I don’t think it does anyway. Surely you would look at this case again rather than get rid of the whole guidance completely? Or maybe I’m misunderstanding something here.
 
TeaCider said:
I'm aware what it says.

Without that guideline, a child rapist would not have had community service considered as acceptable justice for what he did just because he was under 25.

You could say it's down to the judge in question making the decision, but it's still a consequence of the guideline.
Click to expand...
I’m just reading through the Twitter thread you posted earlier and it’s not exactly great reading. I feel like judges are using this guidance in a slightly weird way? I mean, was it intended to be used like this in terms of rapists, serial drug dealers, etc. I would also acknowledge that I should have read ALL of this info before commenting as it looks like incredibly complex and nuanced issue and I don’t really know enough about it to be certain either way.
 
Acklam_Lad said:
Financial crime is an absolute nightmare to investigate and is totally reliant on paper trails usually. The arrest and release is not unusual… they have little evidence to go on from a few hours of questioning.

This was purely about securing anything and everything linked to him so that the financial crimes team can go through it all and then bring appropriate charges if required.

It could take months or even years to find what they need.
Click to expand...
I can second that having been involved in an investigation into fraudulent activity. I would start with looking at the balance sheet and make sure all asset and liability codes can be fully reconciled as you would do for a year end audit.

I used to have a monthly meeting with a board member who centred his questions on the balance sheet, quite rightly in my view. You can make the management accounts so what you want, it's the balance sheet that is more revealing.
 
viv_andersons_nana said:
I’m just reading through the Twitter thread you posted earlier and it’s not exactly great reading. I feel like judges are using this guidance in a slightly weird way? I mean, was it intended to be used like this in terms of rapists, serial drug dealers, etc. I would also acknowledge that I should have read ALL of this info before commenting as it looks like incredibly complex and nuanced issue and I don’t really know enough about it to be certain either way.
Click to expand...

I'm baffled by it, I don't really understand what's going through the judges' heads when they decide some of these sentences.
 
SuperStu said:
I don't think that makes people wrong. That's like saying you'd be wrong to accuse the tories of being in favour of privatisation based on them going along with post war consensus politics in the 50s and 60s. The SNP have been a pretty left wing party for at least 20 years.

Don't agree that wanting independence from a country that always returns right wing governments is a right wing philosophy either. Is that a standard you'd apply to every country thats wanted independence from Britain over the last few hundred years or just Scotland?
Click to expand...
I’m not convinced the SNP are left wing, just populist in trying policies which they think will attract independence voters.

I understand your argument that the Scottish are sick of right wing U.K. governments but over a long period the U.K. has produced the NHS, a welfare state, a good state education for all etc, so I don’t really believe they are the drivers albeit the Tories are a shocking governing party for anybody who doesn’t doff their cap.

I think independence for Scotland is about nationalism, tradition and reversion to the past, an experimental aspiration without any properly thought out economic plan which would place huge power into the hands of the Scottish ruling elite (and there are plenty of Scottish Tories knocking around). Most of Scotland is owned by a small number of landowners. The little people would probably suffer economic hardship, but it is being sold that at least they would be independent and ‘free‘ of the English.

I’m a socialist, I believe in teamwork for the common good, not the mental separation and individualism of independence, barriers need to come down not go up.
 
BiggEggo said:
I hope she gets to share a cell with Michelle Mone if she's found guilty of wrong doings. More politicians should be locked up imo.
Click to expand...
Given that the accusations against Mone are making £29 million profit on a £200 million pound government investment of our money, rather than £600k of party funds for the SNP, you would hope that Mone would be in the cell for a lot longer.

If they are guilty of course.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top