Anyone feeling slightly uncomfortable with the scale of the sentencing after the riots?

I really want to know what he is getting for it?

We have massive amounts of organised crime, money laundering, car thefts, stabbings, burglaries, robberies, shoplifting, drug dealing all going on with impunity in our leafy part of outer London. If we had any police and any of these people were actually arrested, we would need lots more courts and judges and a whole new local prison. I can't see it happening. I am pretty sure at least one nail bar and a car wash involves people trafficking. Everything is reported constantly. Rioting is a step up and I suppose they thought they would get away with it.

What about the people who incited murder in the pro Palestine marches. Seen on newspapers. What did they get? I won’t repeat the hideous messages here but it was actually shown widely.

Oh - and being drunk is no excuse - how many of us getting drunk would even think to try to burn people's cars, smash up people's homes, try to burn people alive in a hotel, burn down kids libraries,....................I'd guess these yobs have a long history of anti social behaviour.

Delighted with the sentences - these people are thugs, rioters, hooligans. They have incited others to join them, attacked our police, damaged houses, burned cars, scared the hell out of peaceful residents, caused thousands of pounds of damage and stolen property from shops. These are not citizens who deserve any sympathy whatsoever, they pleaded guilty to get a reduced sentence when the evidence of their crimes were presented in court, no other reason.
Bet their neighbours are pleased to see the back of them.

Some reports have said people drove for an hour to get to a riot.

So they weren't even local people,pissed off with what's happening in their immediate area.

They were people actually going out with the sheer intention to riot.

Looking at the court stories on the news, plenty of those guilty were drunk and out for a punch up.

Its disgusting the abuse aimed at JK Rowling, MPs and others on line. But thats not a reason to go soft on people inciting murder online during the riots. On the contrary, I think these sentences will help make people realise there are consequences. Theres a culture change needed so that people realise there’s a difference between making a remark like “killings to good for them” verbally to your friend, who you know wont actually carry it out, and writing it on a public forum.

Yes it would stir up trouble and either way it's really bad. However there's a difference between making up shit yourself and causing riots, and tweeting something rubbish that you should have checked up on.

Can't read the article - pay wall.

Zonder this is from the Telegraph but there are lots of other sources too.

‘The boss of an anti-racism charity has apologised after wrongly tweeting that a Muslim woman had been attacked with acid during rioting.
Nick Lowles, chief executive of Hope Not Hate used Twitter on Saturday night to claim there had been reports of an acid attack in Middlesbrough.
“Reports are coming in of acid being thrown out of a car window at a Muslim woman in Middlesbrough. Absolutely horrendous,” Mr Lowles wrote.’

Was it because he had believed something someone told him without enough checks or was it because he made up a random slanderous comment to stir up trouble?
Either way a tweet like that read by 100,000 people will stir up trouble.

Did he? When? Was it because he had believed something someone told him without enough checks or was it because he made up a random slanderous comment to stir up trouble?

I do wonder if the woman who started with the false information is feeling embarrassed?

Nick Lowles, chief executive of Hope Not Hate tweeted false information that a Muslim woman had been subjected to an acid attack. Will he also be arrested?

I think they are being made examples. But so they should be in the public interest to stop the violence from escalating..but I don't forone minute think they will serve the full sentence as no one ever seems to.

As you say in that instance the releases were arranged prior to the riots and therefore he will not be vacating his prison space specifically for those dishing out online incitement.

"The average length of a prison sentence has increased since 1996, rising by more than a third in the decade between 2009 to 2019 alone, with the average sentence length increasing from 13.8 months to 18.9 months."

We've lengthened sentences*
We have not built enough prisons to accomodate this change - thereby storing up problems for the whole system. A failure to anticipate the longer term impact.

https://prisonreformtrust.org.uk/new-survey-reveals-longer-prison-sentences-have-failed-to-improve-public-confidence/

• fully appreciate that its probably a lot more complicated than that. It may be sentencing for the most serious cases has lengthened but custody for summary offences etc has become less likely etc. Somebody somewhere must have done a deep dive on this stuff.

Not examined the release list in any detail but at least one was someone who bought two machetes and gave one to his fellow gang member. Days later he and his friends attacked and killed a 14 year old boy, and stabbed a 17 year old boy non-fatally. He then wrote a rap song celebrating the murder: "Two got splashed in a day, we should have sent both of them to hell." He was "smiling at the camera and repeatedly making a stabbing gesture." He also mocked seeing the victim's mother crying on tv and boasted that he'd "been "nicked for M" but would not be going to jail". He was only given a couple of years as it was not him who delivered the fatal blow; it was the friend he'd given the other machete to. He is now going to be released early and will serve less than a year for his crime. I suppose that technically he was not a violent criminal as he didn't do the stabbing himself, but I can understand why people might be disturbed by the idea of releasing someone like this after eleven and a bit months so they have room to jail people for several years because they posted unpleasant comments on social media or kicked police cars.

(Obviously this is a gross simplification and the releases were decided before the riots started, but I do believe this is the basic narrative that will be slurped up by the aggrieved, and I strongly suspect it's going to cause enormous anger and resentment moving forward.)

And sentences need to send a message. That's part of the whole justice process. It's not just punishment, it's a deterrent to others - always has been.

Does the lack of punishment account for the increase in sexual crimes against women eg on public transport?

@PickAChew Ive definitely slagged off Trump on here but I don’t think I’ve ever wished that!

The sentencing guidelines will have been in place for a long time - I doubt Starmer, even given his background and position as PM can have any direct bearing on the judgements handed down. We can only guess that he's asked the police and the courts to try and process those people arrested ASAP as an important step in trying to stop civil disorder from spreading: that seems pretty reasonable to me. I think the sentencing had been quick and had proved effective in dampening down these idiots.

Nope.

Couldn't agree more - again 😂

I do the route of the "problem" is the ever changing "solutions".

Port of that has been evidenced through scrapping surestart. That has been evidenced as being a positive solution.

Scrapping it has created problems.

Which we now need another solution for.

The ever decreasing circle!

Resources are key. Wholescale reform would be impossible to implement over a 5 year term.

I think - like so many key areas - it needs cross party agreements to produce long term plans that parties commit to implementing. Plans that directly involve and are influenced by those working within the system and understand its faults - rather than politically motivated changes. We need to move beyond 'tough on crime' soundbites and headlines. I doubt I am being realistic in suggesting that though! I will be watching to see how Labour use their time - they have 5 years.

Of course I get the need to deter more violence but women get beaten, abused or receive death threats on SM daily and nothing happens.

Yes, this is the problem exactly. Because this street violence is out in public, and has happened in a brief spasm that captures everyone's attention, it is punished swiftly and harshly. But endemic violence against women and girls, on a far huger scale than this street violence, is a slow-burn constant issue that everyone half-ignores because it has been allowed to become accepted as a permanent state of affairs. So we shrug and let criminal cases languish for months or years, and punish convicted criminals more mildly.

Growing VAWG is an emergency. Why not divert all court resources and jail spaces to crack down on it with the same seriousness as we are (rightly) cracking down on racist rioters?

Absolutely. Couldn't have put it better myself.

And I think the reason we haven't had improvements is because everyone has sat back and watched these being decimated for over a decade.

And rather than campaign for better they've allowed the,selves to be dragged into the culture wars of "either/or" and fighting over who deserves better and who's to blame (pick a minority group!).

I hadn't realised until Andrew pierce (from DM and very openly a Tory supporter) said that his party were wrong for closing 7/14 jails (half 😳).

The fact is EVERYONE deserves better than we had and what we have now.

Better education
Better housing.
Better policing
Better justice system
Better prison services.
Better healthcare and dentistry

Better public services will make EVERYONE feel more included and worthwhile. Make everyone feel the country works for them.

Rather than feeling certain groups get a better chunk of the limited services than they do.

One doesnt come at the cost of the other.

Agreed. The ‘but’ shouldn’t need to be there. Also agreed that a well run and apolitical judicial system is absolutely integral to healthy society.

I’m not sure what the answer is, but of course there was a political element to freeing up spaces to prosecute rioters as quickly as possible. The riots had to be stopped. I will wait and hope that Starmer will also resource our courts to help ensure it becomes a healthier system going forward.

"That is the bit that frustrates me. And we’re seeing it again here. Of course I get the need to deter more violence but women get beaten, abused or receive death threats on SM daily and nothing happens."

Agreed - but if you dont mind me saying you dont need the 'but' in your comment.
We should act to deter wide spread violence and rioting.
We should also act to pressure governments to look again at sentencing guidelines for sexual abuse/rape/online threats etc.

Its not either or.
One doesnt come at the cost of the other.
But it also requires a more widespread review of the state of the system as a whole - from police numbers, to appropriate court staffing and specialist officers/barristers, to prison places etc.

Most of all we need everyone to be interested and invested in the judicial system. It is a central plank to living in a well run society.