Talk

Flip

1 2 3

AIBU?

To believe it is right that "shorts mum" is released?

63 replies

Mitmoo · 20/08/2011 07:51

A woman who reportedly slept through the riots in Manchester, England, was jailed for allegedly taking a pair of shorts looted by a friend, officials said.

Ursula Nevin, 24, was ordered freed on appeal, The Guardian reported Friday.

Nevin, a mother of two, was held for five months before being released in what is believed to be the first successful appeal against a sentence related to rioting and looting in England earlier this year.

Nevin admitted to accepting the shorts from a friend who allegedly took part in rioting in Manchester. The severity of her sentence was questioned because she wasn't involved in the actual crime.

Judge Andrew Gilbart said he ordered Nevin freed because she didn't take part in the riots.

Read more: www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2011/08/19/Woman-freed-in-stolen-shorts-case/UPI-33211313770204/#ixzz1VY7Mq93n

I couldn't beleive she shot 5 months for this in the first place. She was wrong to have taken the shorts from her friend and to let her friend into the flat with the looted property but she wasn't on the streets terrorising anyone and should IMO have been sentenced lighter than those who were.

I am glad the appeal judge has freed her.

OP posts:

Report

Mitmoo · 20/08/2011 19:21

Sara I think there is a difference. If you were the group who admitted going from place to place breaking down shop windows and filling up your transit, before dropping it off, and refilling again, knowing where you could fence the televisions, computers, laptops, xboxes etc. is very different from walking past and helping yourself to a few bottles of water.

Both are thieves but the sentences should be very different to reflect the severity of thieving.

OP posts:

Report

Mitmoo · 20/08/2011 19:23

edam In a way they had no choice but to remand them given the circumstances, they had to get them off the streets to restore order and calm. A few innocents will have got caught up in that. Swift justice will always have an element of injustice but I dread to think of the cost of correcting that over the following months and do fear for the extent of it.

OP posts:

Report

duckdodgers · 20/08/2011 19:24

RebelFromTheWaistDown
" I'm glad for her innocent children."

Well she shouldn't have committed a crime in the first place. Women shouldnt be expected not to get prosecuted and jailed just because they have children! Prisons would be empty if all the people in them were childless.

Report

umf · 20/08/2011 19:24

YANBU. Leaving two children without their mother over a pair of shorts?? They'd be likely to lose their home and have to change school and heaven knows what. Back to the days of transporting children for stealing apples.

Report

TidyDancer · 20/08/2011 19:25

I totally disagree with you, although I do understand why you feel the way you do about it. I just feel that the prison sentence was appropriate.

The moron should've called the police on her flatmate, instead she got up, had a look through the looted goods and decided to profit from them. A prison sentence is entirely right.

Report

Mitmoo · 20/08/2011 19:28

duck she was wrong no doubt, but IMO the punishment was excessive, she has paid a heavy price as she couldn't have known that her appeal would be successful, so she's only spent a week or two in prison now she has got community service. As I said earlier hopefully that will be spend cleaning up the mess left by the rioters.

OP posts:

Report

aliceliddell · 20/08/2011 19:28

Compare and contrast the response of MPs after being caught fraudulently claiming 'expenses' and flipping houses to avoid tax etc. Eg Hazel Blears - just whipped out a cheque for £75k. No jail. Because she had no need to riot to get her stolen goods?

Report

SardineQueen · 20/08/2011 19:33

YANBU

And if we put everyone in prison for this level of crime we need to look at the entire system.

A man today has been released on bail on suspicion of murder. Simultaneously people have been remanded in custody for things like taking a bottle of water.

It is not coherent.

Report

Mitmoo · 20/08/2011 19:34

ALICE A very good point many were just allowed to pay the expenses back and only three I think, maybe four faced jail. Yet a woman, albeit in the context of the riots, was given 5 months for taking a pair of shorts.

Imagine if she had accepted a duck's house?

OP posts: