4 yrs for cutting down tree, no jail time for rape

OK, last time quoting you.
They weren't given a sentence for vandalism.
Who are 'they' who aren't harsh ?
Define serious crime.
👋🏻

There’s nothing ‘alleged’ about it

Other than literally being the same crime under the same Act, you mean?

But yes, I agree the crime here is a little worse than the example I gave, given it included damage to a world heritage site and not some random house.

Well stop quoting me then as I 'don't have an understanding of the topic' <which is 2 blokes got 4 years for vandalism>.

If only they were as harsh with other sentencing is the point. Serious crimes, not vandalism.

I quite agree that we can all comment but you have to realise if you comment without at least a basic understanding of the topic then people won’t give your comment credibility.

The only "questionable" thing about this sentence is that it was too short. Far too short in fact.

It's a chat forum, we can all comment as long as we do so within TGs.

We have seen many questionable sentences of late and 4yrs for cutting down a tree no matter how lovely and allegedly iconic it was is one of them.

There are different sentences for different crimes because they aren’t comparable.

If you don’t know 'where they get these judges from’ perhaps you shouldn't be commenting.

You don’t seem to know a lot about how our Judicial system works

Gloriia seems to think so

Also @2024onwardsandup have you looked into the financial implications

oh and

(f) it is quite easy nowadays to find the legislation and the judgments online to see exactly why something happened

the sentencing judgment is linked it pretty much explains it alk

Well the fact that
(a) there are clear sentencing guidelines
(b) that unless governed by common law there is a statute as well setting out the offences
(c) that we need to have legal processes in place to prevent people doing these kind of things because morality only goes so fae
(d) that yes the worse crimes involve violence but so many don’t and we need punishment for them
(e) separate to all of that the judge is a pretty damn good one
(f) victim impact isn’t just physical violence

It’s more apposite than the original comparison.

It wasn't "mindless vandalism" because they specifically targeted this particular tree.

It was a landmark tree. Saying it was "just a tree" is asinine. By that rationale, someone that blew up buckingham palace or the houses of parliament, should get no harsher sentence than someone who blew up some ruined abandoned shed in the middle of nowhere. Or someone that smashed up the mona lisa should get no harsher sentence than someone who smashed up a cheap watercolour hanging in a pub.

But they of course can be compared in terms of seriousness - that’s the whole point of different sentences for different acts

But that’s obviously not comprable is it

In what way?

This whole thread makes me realise how many don’t understand the legal process and sentencing

I posted earlier about what this judge has done? Have you looked it up?

as it happens 10 years was her sentence for rape

Okay - you and your family are out and about for the day.

Two yobs decide it'd be a laugh to trash your house, and do £60,000 of damage just for the fun of it.

How much community service are you thinking is a suitable punishment?

Again, the damage going to cost a charity about £60,000...

Should doing £60,000 of damage to private property, for a laugh, attract a custodial sentence?

I would assume most people think so? Is it just that they see charities as acceptable victims?

Crimes amd their sentences are absolutely comparable. Mindless vandals are not violent criminals so community service would be more appropriate.

I've no idea where they get these judges from.

Exactly that.

yes and no. They both are tried through the courts (although for damage under £5000) they aren’t but under different legislation

but not only violent offenders have victims are we saying that any white collar crime shouldn’t have a custodial sentence?

and this wasn’t victimless either again have you read about the impact

just because it hasn’t impacted you doesn’t mean it hasn’t financially and emotionally affected others