Good luck Harry The Owl

I'd type another factual acronym but if I did it would most likely get reported and deleted for being transphobic due to one of the letters referring to a three letter word that starts with m and ends with n.

www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/broadhurst-sentencing-remarks.pdf

Paragraphs 8 to 19 are particularly distressing to read. The rest of the remarks also discuss horrible sexual violence.

This is worth noting:

I bear firmly in mind that the offence to which you have pleaded is one of gross negligence manslaughter by leaving Natalie unsupervised at the foot of the stairs without contacting the emergency services in circumstances where there was a risk of death as a result of her condition which would have been obvious to a reasonable and prudent person.

as is this:

The authorities are clear that a person cannot in law consent to being subjected to actual bodily harm or grievous bodily harm for the purposes of sexual pleasure, and I reject Mr Vullo’s submissions to the contrary.

Paragraphs 40 to 42 provide some explanation of why Broadhurst got such a light sentence.

I saw Lady Hale's brooch mentioned on a Brexit thread here, not sure if we were meant to think she's Shelob in disguise or just a witch. And that was when I decided to stop reading the Brexit threads.

Can you also explain Lady Hale and spider brooches please?

Jumping in here FannyCann as I am excited that I know this. Lady Hale has a collection of insect/spider brooches. She was wearing a spider brooch when she gave the Supreme Court verdict that Boris Johnson gave the Queen the wrong advice about proroguing parliament so lots of people added spider emojis to their social media profiles.

So far as I’m aware (but happy to be corrected) there has been no unduly lenient sentence appeal lodged in Natalie’s case?

There was Onlythetitoftheiceberg - I know I sent an email - but the Attorney General did not allow the appeal. John Broadhurst was allowed to appeal to have his sentence reduced but it was refused. However, we shouldn't forget it was the CPS who went for manslaughter, not murder which obviously affected the length of the sentence.

So you know what else is a factual acronym?
WoDHaP

Women don’t have penises!!

Excellent point OnlyTheTit
Thank you.

Can you also explain Lady Hale and spider brooches please?

It reminds me of MRA arguments I've seen on the subject of "bitch is a factual description of some women's behavior". Six of one, half a dozen of the other.

I have only ever seen that "factual acronym" used with hate and venom by misogynists.

Jury reached the verdict but judge passes sentence, and 3.5 years isn’t anywhere near the maximum for manslaughter - but as a PP says, without access to every piece of evidence and mitigation, we can’t know what the judge heard. So far as I’m aware (but happy to be corrected) there has been no unduly lenient sentence appeal lodged in Natalie’s case?

Someone is upset they can no longer freely insult women?

That tweeter appears to be a GC radfem rufflecrow, to be fair to her.

And the jury would have reached the verdict in the NC case, not the judge.

.

As someone said up thread, judges can only judge on the evidence they're given, and make decisions according to the law. I don't know enough about the Natalie Connolly case to know what the judge saw, but if there was sufficient plausible deniability the options were pretty limited.

Agree with OnlytheTit - this judge can be justly criticised for that pathetic sentence - but this is indeed another legal battle for women to to face - the "rough sex defence"

But I'm still very pleased to hear the words "Terf is a derogatory term used to deplatform people you disagree with" and that "phobic" is overused" spoken by a Judge in the High Court. It shows that there are still people in power who have not been captured, that common sense can still prevail.

Our friends think that the judges comments over a ‘factual acronym’ were ‘concerning’.

Well they're either stupid or deliberately trolling. Factual acronym my arse.

That definitely puts a dent in my sisterly feelings, but like RuffleCrow I don't believe for a second that the people pointing it out care about Natalie Connelly. Just more manipulation.

The people trying to push back against Harry's case are likely to be the same people pushing all the sex positive stuff that got us into a position where the law thinks women can consent to being sexually tortured to death.

Yes, and that’s another fight that many of us are supporting elsewhere. At the moment “sex game gone wrong” is, unfortunately, a valid defence to murder. We are supporting Harriet Harman’s campaign to change this. The judge sentenced on the “facts” available to him and on what had been proven or admitted to in a court of law, with recourse to sentencing guidelines.

Let’s not start down the Daily Mailesque “enemy of the people” road when judges don’t act in accordance with how we’d like the law to be. Equally, let’s not immediately turn into squealing fangirls when the judge’s actions do happen to align with our views (see also: Lady Hale and spider brooches) because another case on another day will be different.

So the woke suddenly care about murdered women (and suddenly know what one is)?

Have just seen this on twitter.

That's an excellent point about poor old PC Plod Gul. Perhaps we can crowd fund for his case against Stonewall.

Ooh someone isn't happy!

They're only ever happy if they have something to gloat over. Miserable.

@teawamutu

If PC Gul's career is adversely affected, presumably he can sue his employer because the rotten Stonewall training they arranged has damaged his reputation and his promotion prospects. He is the one person who won't suffer for his uselessness.