Forum Topic

Cameron talked tough on sentencing rioters but ...

"David Attoh, 18, was arrested in Hackney, with two Burberry T-shirts. Attoh, who was due to have an interview for an apprenticeship on Tuesday, admitted theft and was fined £150. The magistrate told him: "Don't get in trouble again. You have a bright future."source: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/courts-sit-round-the-clock-to-administer-fasttrack-justice-2335675.htmlHow nice of the magistrate to show such concern for the criminal's well being.

Ian Fillingham ● 5111d12 Comments

I believe this government are driven by ideaology first, public bad - private good, they know the cost of everything and the value of nothing. They make sure their own are O.K. and don't give a stuff about the rest of us.

Vanessa Smith ● 5110d

I agree that one case doesn't seem much, but when this young man returns to his peer group what will they be most influenced by, reports from other parts of the country by a media they probably don't trust or the first hand account of one of their own? Unfortunately letting one person off light sends the wrong message to far more than one person.

Ian Fillingham ● 5110d

"So once again in their desire to save money the government has shot itself in the foot."'desire' is an interesting choice of word. Do you believe the government are making cuts for pleasure and enjoyment?It was amazing watching Ed Milliband on Newsnight admitting to a long list of mistakes made by the last government, but somehow missing out spending gargantuan amounts of money that we didn't actually have.

Ian Fillingham ● 5110d

So, are you asking us to draw conclusion based on a single case, then?  That's not very intellectually rigorous, is it?[if you take the trouble to look around, you'll see that many the sentences handed out are extraordinarily tough, to the extent that even the maddest authoritarian might start to conclude that the law doesn't actually need tightening.  Or is that wishful thinking given the customary standards of education and knowledge from the kneejerkers?]

Thomas Barry ● 5110d

Before Cameron shouts his mouth off he should think about how he has constrained Magistrate's courts regarding sentencing with the desire to keep people out of custody to save a few bob. So they now find themselves with little room to crack down on the looters. True many are being sent up to the Crown Court for sentencing where they do have more power to give longer sentences, but in the case of the very young, unless they have committed a really very serious crime a referral order is quite likely all they will get. So once again in their desire to save money the government has shot itself in the foot.

Vanessa Smith ● 5110d

I was saying it would be interesting to find out more about who rioted where. I used Acton as an example because it is the first place in the direction the trouble spread from that has a reputation for gang culture.

Ian Fillingham ● 5111d

Ian, not quite sure where you are coming from on this!Are you suggesting that the rsidents of Acton which has a large population of people living in social housing are responsible?

Christopher Boucher ● 5111d

There's a rather interesting analysis of the people who appeared before one court yesterday here:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-14489984Just under 70% were aged 24 or under.Perhaps more interesting is that at least 70% did not live in the postcode area in which they committed the offence, so much for people smashing up their own communities. I wonder if the much of the rioting was actually an extension of the postcode wars which have been rife in gang culture for some time now. The timeline of the Ealing riot was by all accounts Ealing Common first, then Ealing Broadway and finally West Ealing. Given the direction it travelled you can't help wondering how many of those responsible were from Acton.

Ian Fillingham ● 5111d

But isn't it always easy to blame those who live in social housing? There really does need to be a radical overhaul of views from Government to support those people who do live in Social Housing because that is the only choice they have!

Christopher Boucher ● 5111d

Yes, I think you are right - there are assumptions being made which may turn out to be very silly, given the age ranges of some of the people appearing in court so far, it would be daft to imiagine that all the looting was done by youngsters.After all, both Dodgy Dave and BoJo have histories of hooliganism which they have conveniently forgotten it seems, but then they were just spoilt, priviliged rich kids having laugh and with family clout to make it come right for them, unlike the people we are seeing now.

Vanessa Smith ● 5111d

I think it also betrays a built-in assumption that those responsible will be living in social housing, when the first trials have already begun to suggest that this is not always the case.Disengagement is about more than poverty, and not all those who feel alientated and estranged from our society are necessarily living on the breadline.

Phil Andrews ● 5111d

Well- that's a difficult one - but the Magistrate couldn't possibly know whether this boy's future would be bright or not, on the other hand so many of these kids need work,  would it have been in the interests of the community to have lost him what might be his one and only chance of an apprenticeship? I'm pretty annoyed by this suggestion that people who  are council tenants could have their homes taken away if they or their kids were involved in the trouble. So that means they get punished twice? What could be done about those who own their homes, some of whom have been found to be involved and also quite well off, or those who privately rent -nothing, seems very discriminatory to me. Punish them through the courts by all means but evicting them from their homes will only make matters worse.

Vanessa Smith ● 5111d