Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to think that 8 years is not enough?

39 replies

negrilbaby · 27/02/2015 21:25

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-31656934

Gary Glitter gets 16 years.

This man raped a 3 year old boy and sexually assaulted a teenage girl and got only 8 years. I don't understand

OP posts:
Koalafications · 27/02/2015 21:26

YANBU.

facedontfit · 27/02/2015 21:47

I knew exactly what your heading was referring to. YANBU. Ian Watkins got 35 years. That's about right.

ahfuckit · 27/02/2015 22:18

Will he actually serve 8 years or will it be more like 4? Not sure if the legal system works the same way?

molyholy · 27/02/2015 22:20

Insane. I cannot understand how the fuck the judiciary system works out sentences for peadophiles. It is totally bizarre.

Boysclothes · 27/02/2015 22:21

Judge could only give the sentence he could have given in the seventies. He mentioned it in his summing up.

vestandknickers · 27/02/2015 22:24

I cannot understand how the fuck the judiciary system works out sentences for peadophiles.

Maybe because you don't have any kind of legal training?

Just a thought.

Summerbreezer · 27/02/2015 22:25

Will he actually serve 8 years or will it be more like 4? Not sure if the legal system works the same way?

Seems it is automatic release at 2/3 point in Scotland. Nicola is reforming it though...www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-31109682

It does seem very lenient, but it is a totally different jurisdiction to E&W. Scots law and English law are worlds apart.

Behooven · 27/02/2015 22:28

YANBU. I hope Karma catches him, in the worst way possible.

FarFromAnyRoad · 27/02/2015 22:30

Judge could only give the sentence he could have given in the seventies. He mentioned it in his summing up

I didn't know this. Does that mean that if we try someone for a murder committed in the 40's they can be sentenced to hang?

meditrina · 27/02/2015 22:37

I don't think so, FarFromAnyRoad, as the 1965 Act made it illegal to impose the death penalty, and specified life imprisonment instead.

Chillyegg · 27/02/2015 22:50

What an absolutely appalling human being! Shock

I agree with the poster who said about karma! I hope the rest of his life is one big plop of shit.

Those poor children and young people!

GokTwo · 27/02/2015 22:56

8 years. Blimey. That's an insult.

fearandloathinginambridge · 27/02/2015 22:57

Maybe the sentencing rules in Scotland are different? Also, I think the Glitter case involved more than two victims. Whatever, I think both sentences are waaaay too short.

RandomNPC · 27/02/2015 22:59

I don't suppose he'll have a particularly safe or pleasant time in prison

Iliveinalighthousewiththeghost · 27/02/2015 23:01

YNBU. 8 years is an absolute joke and an insult, and let's be honest with our farce of a legal system he is u likely to serve the full 8 years.
If it were up to me. I'd throw the key away and have him castrated painfully and slowly.

SlaggyIsland · 27/02/2015 23:01

Seems to be form for this in Scotland. There was a particularly dreadful case in Edinburgh involving a 2 year old girl and I believe the attacker also got eight years, which I thought absolutely inadequate.

FarFromAnyRoad · 27/02/2015 23:02

Thanks meditrina - I suppose I didn't really think that one through properly!

TheJiminyConjecture · 27/02/2015 23:05

Absolutely dreadful. Surely the judge could give a far longer statement. Those poor children

Original poster
negrilbaby · 27/02/2015 23:34

Judge could only give the sentence he could have given in the seventies. He mentioned it in his summing up

The offences happen between 2012 and 2013 - not in the seventies.

I only mentioned Gary Glitter because I heard both cases mentioned in the same news bulletin on the radio today - and was really surprised at such a short sentence.

OP posts:
RJnomore · 27/02/2015 23:37

No, the offenses took place between 1975 and 1980.

Original poster
negrilbaby · 27/02/2015 23:45

The case in Scotland I'm referring to involves Mark Maclennan, 30, of Bath. I can't imagine he was able to commit crimes in the 70s.

The BBC report says the rape happened some time between 1 August 2012 and 23 May 2013 and the abuse of the girl happened between October 2007 and July 2010.

I was not referring to Gary Glitter's offences.

OP posts:
Behooven · 28/02/2015 00:02

Yeah, a few cross-posts above. Evil men both.

Summerbreezer · 28/02/2015 00:54

let's be honest with our farce of a legal system

As a lawyer, comments like this really get my goat. No, it is not perfect. But look at the legal system around the world - to China, to Syria, even to the Southern US. Try being a woman in Uganda, where you have few property rights on the death of your husband.

We should all be grateful for our legal system. It is our check against the power of the government. Taking it for granted will lead us down a very dark path.

fluffymouse · 28/02/2015 01:13

It is a shockingly leniant sentence.

I would support indefinite incarceration for sex offenders, as happens in the us, where they have to successfully complete a treatment programme before being released after serving their prison sentence.

OutragedFromLeeds · 28/02/2015 01:24

'No, the offenses took place between 1975 and 1980.'

No. You are wrong RJ.

The man convicted is 30 years old. He wasn't even alive between 1975-80.

If you read the link before you comment it means your contribution is less likely to be totally wrong. Just an idea.

Swipe left for the next trending thread