Inappropiate sentencing
 

Have these two low lifes been sentenced appropriately? Personally I'd have thrown the key away.
http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk..._girl_s_death/

Re: Inappropiate sentencing
 

Re: Inappropiate sentencing
 

It’s cases like these that make a good case for bringing back the death penalty.

They deserve no less. Instead they will probably only serve half the sentence, in relative comfort too. The only hope is that the other inmates will teach them the error of their ways.

Re: Inappropiate sentencing
 

No matter what sentence they got they would never suffer as that poor little girl did. They should be kept without food and water and left to live in squald conditions but they will be kept well nourished. It is way beyond my comprehension how two parents can allow their child to suffer so!!! Lets hope she has found peace wherever she is the poor little mite.

Re: Inappropiate sentencing
 

It's not enough!

They should be treat in the same way they saw fit to treat a 3 yr old child!!
That's disgusting and they deserve everything they are gonna get and 100 times more

That poor child!:(

Re: Inappropiate sentencing
 

apparently around the same time the girl died the woman rang her friend worried that her dog wasnt eating and was losing weight!!!

i agree with accylass.. she should get the same as the poor little girl did, she didnt even realise for 3 days that she had died!

Re: Inappropiate sentencing
 

As an after thought they should never be allowed to have any more children!!!

Re: Inappropiate sentencing
 

She will only be 34 when she gets out, and this is England,
so she will really be out when she it 28!!

She should be stitched up

Re: Inappropiate sentencing
 

any more children she has will be taken into care at birth.. she should be sterilised in prison.. in fact she should die in prison and painfully!

Re: Inappropiate sentencing
 

Re: Inappropiate sentencing
 

yeah.....with 2 bricks!

Re: Inappropiate sentencing
 

Why did she get 12 years and he only got 5 years they are both as guilty of this terrible crime:confused:

Re: Inappropiate sentencing
 

Yep but without pain relief!! Why oh why are these atrocities allowed to happen?? Surely somebody knew they had a child, it really beggars belief IMHO that nobody stepped in!!!

Re: Inappropiate sentencing
 

How could you do that to a child,Your own child for that matter?
Unfortunately in this country the punishment never fits the crime.
If this had been in America proper justice would have been done,isn't it about time we looked to them when giving out sentences in this country?
Oh yeah i forgot about human rights!
Why should the parents have any rights,when they took their childs life they should have any rights taken away.
What a soft touch we are.

Re: Inappropiate sentencing
 

Re: Inappropiate sentencing
 

It appears that murder charges were dropped and they were charged with manslaughter instead, the judge said she would have got 22 years if it had have been a murder charge. Isn't that what is wrong with our system of justise in this country, make the punishment fit the crime

Re: Inappropiate sentencing
 

I hope that when the pair do get out their home address is public knowledge.

Re: Inappropiate sentencing
 

I think if somebody had murdered this poor child by recognised methods, they would have got life (for what that is worth in this country), to put this in perspective, neglecting the child, starving the child, child cruelty and casuing her death should have all been seperate charges with seperate sentences not running concurrently, my guess is that would add up to more than they got, and would still not be enough, in cases like this, manslaghter should not be an option, starving a child to death is murder and nothing less, for that they should both have hung.

Re: Inappropiate sentencing
 

Re: Inappropiate sentencing
 

How can someone do that to a child.

Sickening, and she was heard commenting about her dog weight and condition.

I hope she get a good pasting in jail daily.:mad:

Re: Inappropiate sentencing
 

Well Willow to me if your going to starve a two year old child for twelve months, whilst at the same time worrying about your dog losing weight, you can't actually convince anybody with half a brain that your not trying to kill the poor little mite, both you and me know what their intentions were, its just a pity that the judge in their Ivory Towers can't actually see throught the rubbish that is our legal system. Until we start dishing out sentencing that is actually deterrant to these low lifes, then nothing is going to change anytime soon.

Re: Inappropiate sentencing
 

How do people like this manage to find someone to defend them? I know we all have a living to make but surely even lawyers have a conscience and draw the line at which cases they take on. Or are they assigned certain cases? Perhaps our resident legal eagle, Ms. Blazey QC, could enlighten us.

Re: Inappropiate sentencing
 

Whats the QC for yerself,:confused: ah must be Quite Cute:D:p

Re: Inappropiate sentencing
 

Isn't it some cheap brand of sherry? I presume this is your personal opinion of our learned colleague.:D

Re: Inappropiate sentencing
 

!2 years for killing a kid?..........thats typical british justice for ya:(

Re: Inappropiate sentencing
 

Every person charged with committing a crime, no matter what it is, is entitled to defend themselves or hire a lawyer to do so on their behalf. Most people who face a criminal charge will have a defence lawyer appointed or they can select one if they cannot afford one under the Legal Aid scheme. In spite of the attempts by the media we do not try the accused by media or public opinion. And that is it should be because in the eyes of the law the accused is innocent until proved guilty by their peers.

I think that the only grounds that a lawyer can refuse a case are the lack of expertise in that particular field of the law or not having the time to take on another case. Thus a lawyer generally dealing with corporate law would be able to decline a criminal case and vice versa.

A defence lawyer does not judge the client and will do everything in his/her power to get the accused off the charge or gain the absolute minimum sentence. That’s his/her job. Similarly the prosecution team do the opposite.

The judge applies the law once a jury has come to a decision although the judge can direct the jury if the prosecution evidence is so weak or extremely strong. But the jury are not obliged to take the direction on board.

This particular crime was beyond belief but the law is the law, even if it is an ass at times and without it we would have vigilante groups and anarchy.

Re: Inappropiate sentencing
 

No just passing a comment yerself:D but I don't think she's a cheap sherry:eek:

Re: Inappropiate sentencing
 

Ya JB but it still doesn't stop me wondeing how they sleep at night:(

Re: Inappropiate sentencing
 

Must agree panther, mind you I've always thought that in cases like this the terrif should be set by a panel of mothers with young children, I think then scum like this would get their just desserts

Re: Inappropiate sentencing
 

Of course Jambutty, and that is the way the law should operate. Just wondered what defence was put up here. Must have been particularly difficult to put up any kind. They surely must be completely off their trolley that's the only defence I can think of at this moment after reading that report ... heartbreaking case. Difficult to get the images out of your head of how this 3-year old must have suffered, isn't it.

Re: Inappropiate sentencing
 

Sadly the tariffs are set by the government and it seems to be in a world of its own so the blame lies fairly and squarely with it.

So lobby your MP to get things changed as well as making your views know on here.

Re: Inappropiate sentencing
 

I agree I just cannot imagine what sort of a defence was put forward, except possibly insanity.

Not being a learned lawyer I cannot see why the prosecution didn’t go for murder but I suppose that as the women pleaded guilty to manslaughter and the guy to child cruelty it was seen to be easier to get a conviction on those charges than to go for murder.

With the tariff for manslaughter and child cruelty being less than the one for murder the judge’s hands were tied. I suspect that they got the maximum allowed in law.

It makes you wonder how Ronald Biggs got 30 years just for robbing a mail train and GBH to the driver. But it was a Royal Mail train and thus the crime was against the crown and the public had to shown that you cross the monarchy at your peril.

At least the little girl is not suffering any more.

Re: Inappropiate sentencing
 

Cases like this should not be defended, when it is so black and white, the charge should be murder, with no easy option to get an easier prosecution with a lighter sentence, many cases do require defence lawyers, but this one, in my opinion did not, killing a child is to me a far more serious crime than upsetting the monarchy.

Re: Inappropiate sentencing
 

Do you advocate vigilantism?

It is black and white now that we’ve had access to the evidence and it may have seemed to be black and white when the police first made the discovery but we don’t live in a police state – yet.

The Judge Dreadd scenario only exists in comic books and films – so far.

Re: Inappropiate sentencing
 

But who decides what's a "black and white case" and whether or not someone deserves a defence? Better to give everyone a fair trial with a defence and if they're found guilty, smash down on them like a ton of bricks - a real life sentence in a hard labour camp for these two.

Unfortunately, the present government hasn't the guts to implement anything like that and the opposition hasn't the guts to include anything like that in their manifesto...and not one member of the Labour, Tory or Lib Dem parties can come on here and justify this stance.