Suspended sentence? That's all?

zinco it is not just about punishment, it is about keeping others safe as well. Some offenders respond well to the suspended sentence by trying to stay out of trouble, to avoid custody, so it could be that others are safer because the suspended sentence is there.

Sex offenders are notoriously hard to rehabilitate, it is an ongoing problem.

"The recording was an invasion of privacy, similar to upskirting, but his offences there predate the upskirting law and so cannot technically result in a prison sentence because laws cannot be applied retroactively."

That's not what the news story suggests at all. The news story suggests that he admitted to an existing crime with what he had done with video recording. So yes he could be punished for it presumably.

"However in some cases a suspended sentence can be a better choice as it works as a deterrent"

Well what do you want the justice system to do? Some people may want the justice system to punish people for the sake of the victims. If that's what you want, then a suspended sentence is just a slap in the face to the victims, because they completely failed to get justice from the court.

Now I realise that some people would see such an emphasis on punishment as "backwards", "merely revenge", and we need a more enlightened and humanitarian system today; but just to point out, sometimes victims want offenders to be punished.

"Well, N Ireland is in no way a liberal society and plenty of other offenders go to prison. It's sexual offenders who consistently seem to go unpunished."

The stats I found...

www.justice-ni.gov.uk/publications/court-prosecutions-convictions-and-out-court-disposals-statistics-northern-ireland-2019

Sexual offenders were treated in a fairly similar way to "violence against the person". Now that's not entirely clear as a comparison, because both categories cover a lot of different ground. Robbery had much higher use of custodial sentence.

Meant to say non-native English speaker.

plan A history of the same offences would have been an aggravating feature, and a suspended sentence does seem lenient given the nature of the offences, previous history etc.
However in some cases a suspended sentence can be a better choice as it works as a deterrent, it hangs over the offender for a much longer period than a short burst in custody. A suspended sentence can be put in place for an extended time, perhaps eighteen months or longer maybe with supervision. He will be on the sex offenders register for life.

One more incident of any kind, and his sentence will be activated in full.

Don't mean to derail, but I really wish we'd change the terminology used around reporting sentencing. If you're a non-English speaker, young, don't watch the news a lot, or for whatever other reason aren't familiar with the terminology, and aren't the kind of person who tends to analyse or look up phrases you don't happen to know if you're just skimming through a news story, the phrase "three years in prison, suspended for three years" sounds like it's saying he's going to get three years in prison, because that's the main clause, with the "suspended" part just explaining some other detail about it (maybe delayed or something). Makes it less obvious that a lot of people sentenced for some really quite serious crimes don't go to prison. I know when I was a young teenager I didn't know what it meant.

Even if the bit about him having a hard time getting it up was true (sure, mate), why is anyone meant to care? The only reason a lawyer would present that argument is that they are confident that a man's sad penis will be considered more important than any amount of harm he's done to women.

Well we are not in full possession of the facts so I’d like to think the judge made the right call.
On sexual assault that can range from a pat on the bum to attempted rape. Obviously should not carry a custodial sentence for the former, but should for the latter.
Assault causing actual bodily harm, well I’ve done that when I slapped a man. It’s a step down from grevious bodily harm in that no lasting marks or damage to skin when it is ABH instead of GBH. Again, should someone go to prison for one instance of minor assault? No.
The recording was an invasion of privacy, similar to upskirting, but his offences there predate the upskirting law and so cannot technically result in a prison sentence because laws cannot be applied retroactively.
So, in the absence of the court documents, I am leaning towards supporting the judge’s decision as they had way more information than the media has put in the article. The media also has a long history of misreporting court cases specifically to whip up outrage and controversy.

Way too soft, but I doubt it's a sex offenders issue. There are lots of cases where sentences seem ridiculously soft. Liberals don't like to punish people basically.

Could you show where your figures to compare violent offenders against sex reoffending are from please?

ABH doesn't count as violence any more if it's against a woman and related to a sex offence.

Rape, unless there's non-sexual violence doesn't count either.

Apparently shoving a penis into someone isn't violent if he doesn't punch them too. I bet they'd change their tune if someone was shoving something into them!

I don't understand the judge in this case, the question before deciding whether or not to sentence should always be, 'what More could they have done to warrant a custodial sentence? I think this mans actions warrant being locked up

No longer surprised by any of this. But men don’t do this do they?

There was a Dr a week or so ago who was caught in a sting operation attempting to groom a 12 yr old girl. He didn't even lose his medical licence.

Oh sorry I misunderstood.

The point was that sexual violence is not 'real' violence.

And men who commit sex offences should get light sentences because other men do worse things.

Yep that makes perfect sense.

TheInebriati when they can be bothered to treat them

'The defendant admitted sexually assaulting one of his victims in 2012, and assaulting another woman, occasioning actual bodily harm, in 2015'

I flagged in my answer to op that there were contact offences.

ABH doesn't count as violence any more if it's against a woman and related to a sex offence.

2 posters support this view. WTAF X 10000.