Talk

Advanced search

To think 18 months jail for giving 3-year-old a cigarette is excessive?

(103 Posts)
SomeGuy Thu 15-Oct-09 17:04:20

See: news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/tyne/8308946.stm

"During that hearing, they heard that he handed the lit cigarette to the child and encouraged her to inhale it.

Conroy then persuaded another child, aged 14, to film it on a mobile phone for fun, the court heard.

But it was this that proved to be his undoing when the footage, which was recorded on 24 February, was discovered and he was reported to the police.

In the footage Conroy can be heard laughing and at one point someone is heard saying: "She'll smoke it all herself."

The court heard that when the girl put the cigarette out in an ashtray, she asked for another. "

This bloke is obviously as rough as old boots, and scummy too boot, but a 3-year-old is not going to suffer long-term health damage from smoking a cigarette like this, yet this bloke gets 18 months in prison.

OTOH, you can sit with four kids in your car/house with the windows up, smoking like a chimney, smoke in your baby's bedroom, whatever you like, and do it for years, and nothing will be done.

18 months is the same sentence as was handed down for grooming and raping a child recently www.thisisbristol.co.uk/news/Man-jailed-18-months-seducing-14-year-old-girl/article-1352791-detail/a rticle.html

JeMeSouviens Thu 15-Oct-09 17:07:39

I don't think it's excessive. The girl had smoked 3 cigarettes prior to the one filmed, according to the article. Who knows how often this occurred.

I think what it does highlight is sentences for other more serious crimes are woefully inadequate.

ShinyAndNew Thu 15-Oct-09 17:13:31

I don't think it is it excessive at all far from it.

I am a smoker myself but would never allow my children to smoke let alone encourage it.

It might as well be child abuse. A three year old cannot make an informed descision about smoking or becoming addicted to smoking.

And as for ot not causing any harm, no maybe not, but it will have laid down the seeds for a future addiction.

colditz Thu 15-Oct-09 17:14:33

Nope.

I don't.

MusterMix Thu 15-Oct-09 17:14:41

i htink there is prob more to it.

pippel Thu 15-Oct-09 17:16:25

no its not at all excessive

i think its right, they are dangerous, addivitive drugs at the end of the day. would you be asking the same if there was puff inside the cigrette, just because its legal, doesnt make it right.

nappyzonecantrunfortoffee Thu 15-Oct-09 17:18:37

definetly not excessive

TheCrackFox Thu 15-Oct-09 17:18:56

I don't think it is excessive. However, I wish that there was more consistency regarding sentencing. Last week a mother stubbed a cigarette out (3 times) on her baby but got a 9 month sentence.

Hassled Thu 15-Oct-09 17:19:15

It's irrelevant whether other sentences have been adequate. You have to look at each case idividually. In this case I think 18 months is fair enough and more than deserved.

MissMoopy Thu 15-Oct-09 17:20:05

It is not excessive, it is child abuse and exploitation. Who knows what else he was doing?

thedollshouse Thu 15-Oct-09 17:20:13

I don't think it is excessive. They are giving the child something that we know we will harm them.

gorionine Thu 15-Oct-09 17:20:33

I have a 3 yo and the idea of someone making her smoke really makes me sick. I do not think it is exessive at all, I do think the 18 months jail for grooming and rape is far too lenient though!

EnidsOTHERBretonTop Thu 15-Oct-09 17:20:36

No

MusterMix Thu 15-Oct-09 17:22:43

you arent enid?

SomeGuy Thu 15-Oct-09 17:47:28

> It's irrelevant whether other sentences have been adequate. You have to look at each case idividually. In this case I think 18 months is fair enough and more than deserved.

Sorry I should have made it clearer that that was my point. You can't look at cases individually, sentencing has to be relative to sentences handed down in other cases. Otherwise he would have grounds for appeal 'why do I get 18 months when Mr. X only got 9 months'.

I think the sentence is fine - but then you have to increase all the other sentences as well.

We are not in the US, where long prison sentences are routine, and you can ONLY judge the fairness of a sentence by comparing it with other crimes.

If 18 months is fair, it has to be fair relative to other crimes of this nature. Which I don't think it is.

If sentences generally are perceived as too short of child abuse then that means our sentencing policy overall is too lenient.

AFAIK, the question to answer is not 'is 18 months a fair sentence?', but 'is the harm/wickedness here comparable to that in other cases where 18-month sentences have been set'.

You can drink alcohol at 5, and smoke over your children at any age.

Hassled Thu 15-Oct-09 17:58:06

But surely he would only have grounds for appeal - 'why do I get 18 months when Mr. X only got 9 months' - if Mr X had also encouraged a 3 year old to smoke? If Mr X had committed the same crime and had a lower sentence, then an appeal would be a)justified and b) useful in order to draw attention to the iniquity in sentencing. I agree there does seem to be a fairly haphazard approach to sentencing in some cases.

Tryharder Thu 15-Oct-09 18:03:35

But it's not just the fact that a toddler smoked a cigarette which as the OP said, is not much different to parents continually smoking over their kids...

It's the fact that this man foisted cigarettes onto a toddler not old enough to know her own mind, and then filmed it "for a laugh". So had he gone unchecked, who knows what else he would have made this hapless little girl do "for a laugh". Give him a blowjob? Shoot up heroin?

I mean, come on people, this is not the same as someone smoking over their kids. This is child abuse pure and simple. I think the scumbag should have got a longer sentence, personally.

TennisFan Thu 15-Oct-09 18:06:30

I heard this earlier today on the radio news and I was almost sick at my desk at work.
What kind of sick people live in this country nowadays?
No 18 months is not too harsh, far from it.

SomeGuy Thu 15-Oct-09 18:07:13

I don't think they would have to compare it with somebody else that's done the same thing. It would have to be the same type of crime ('child abuse' or whatever they're calling it), but I think it's reasonable to compare say assault on a child with this and look at which is more depraved and which is more harmful and then compare sentences.

From the reporting it seems the judge is making out he's never heard of anything so horrific, yet you just need to read the newspapers or go out in public to realise that this behaviour is not that out-of-the-ordinary at all.

motherofthetoothlesswonder Thu 15-Oct-09 18:09:47

apparently he bragged that she had smoked cannabis too

he was a vile nobber and deserves to be locked up

Tryharder Thu 15-Oct-09 18:12:06

Someguy, why do you call this behaviour not that out of the ordinary.

I have never heard of someone making a 3 year old (a three year old FFS) smoke cigarettes and film it because it was funny. I don't know anyone who wouldn't find that incredibly repugnant.

WinkyWinkola Thu 15-Oct-09 18:15:04

A vile nobber indeed! He needs to be kept away from all little kids. What a weirdo.

Just because there are stupidly lenient sentences for grooming and raping a child doesn't mean all sentences have to slack.

WinkyWinkola Thu 15-Oct-09 18:15:11

A vile nobber indeed! He needs to be kept away from all little kids. What a weirdo.

Just because there are stupidly lenient sentences for grooming and raping a child doesn't mean all sentences have to be slack.

JodieO Thu 15-Oct-09 18:16:10

I don't think it is, no.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now