Angel kidnapping

[WorkHardPlayHard1]

AIBU to be sick to the back teeth by this crime and the lenient sentences.

What can we do to change the law, the sentence and what to do with proven controlling members of society?

He is gonna come out and do the same no doubt. How can we stop this before it happens to womenkind again?

news.sky.com/story/amp/angel-lynn-family-of-teenager-who-was-thrown-out-of-van-call-for-tougher-sentences-for-her-kidnappers-12542792

Come on ladies, if this was the judge's daughter would this even happen?? I can't comprehend why the sentences are so lenient??

This happened literally just down the road from where I live. I thought that the reason the sentence was so lenient was because they could not prove whether Angel was thrown from the van or fell. I hope the sentence is increased. Shocking.

He would get a lot more time for embezzlement. Absolutely disproportionate priorities here.

Looks like a lenient sentence for kidnap and nothing for injury as they can't prove he pushed her? And yes I know she wouldn't have fell if he hadn't kidnapped and yes he should have a longer sentence. But I'm guessing that's why the severity of her injuries don't seem to be considered

Suella Braverman decides? "Attorney General Suella Braverman is now reviewing both sentences to see if they are "unduly lenient"."

@Justilou1

He would get a lot more time for embezzlement. Absolutely disproportionate priorities here.

No he wouldn't. The maximum sentence for the worst cases under FA2006 is 10 years.

www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/fraud-act-2006#:~:text=conduct%20or%20purpose.-,Penalty,1985%20to%2010%20years'%20imprisonment.

Kudos to her mother who while taking on the huge burden of caring for Angel is the one who has pushed and pushed for the sentence to be reviewed.

for Angels mum.

Also, she chose to be in the van with him shortly before, she got out after a row

The fact she'd previously been in the van is completely irrelevant.

This story is disgusting. He didn't even get the maximum sentence for kidnap. That poor girl.

@HeadPain

Suella Braverman decides? "Attorney General Suella Braverman is now reviewing both sentences to see if they are "unduly lenient"."

Yes, it is the attorney general's office which reviews sentences referred under the unduly lenient rules.

The issue with kidnap carrying a blanket life sentence is that it would put every kidnap victim at risk of being murdered.
There would be nothing to lose in terms of sentencing, but murdering the victim and attempting to hide the body would be the only chance of avoiding a life sentence.

Having said that, the terrible injuries this young woman suffered certainly merit a longer sentence and I am glad to see it being reviewed.

@viques

Kudos to her mother who while taking on the huge burden of caring for Angel is the one who has pushed and pushed for the sentence to be reviewed.

for Angels mum.

And she mentions her son has additional needs too, she sounds like an incredible mum and a wonderful woman. I can't even comprehend how hard this must be for her, and the strength it must take to keep going.

The video of her abduction is terrifying, the sentence, although technically within the maximum terms stipulated is absolutely outrageous.

@MyCatEatsPrawnCrackers

Her mum and aunt were on BBC Breakfast today and the aunt was saying how other female members of the family are being intimidated by the families of the two scumbags. Absolutely appalling.

I watched that, it is appalling.

@Lockheart "Yes, it is the attorney general's office which reviews sentences referred under the unduly lenient rules."

Thanks. Do you know the maximum it can be increased to?

I read this story a week or two ago and had the same horrified reaction. I don't know what the solution is. There have been a few "woman jumps from balcony to escape male attacker" stories, where the woman dies or is badly injured too. This is the same thing - a woman who knows her life is in danger feels her only chance is to jump - and that's seen as her decision, and the man is bound up in other charges but not geld responsible for those injuries. I despair.

He should have received a life sentence. He ended her life as she knew it and everyone who knows and loves her, especially her family who are now looking after her.

@Theluggage15

It is appalling but they couldn’t prove how she came to fall out of the van. His sentence was more for taking her against her will I think. I do hope his sentence is increased, if he hadn’t have grabbed her in the first place she wouldn’t have been hurt. Such a terrible story.

Whether she jumped or was pushed, it's completely obvious from that video that she was abducted and put into the van against her will. No one will ever know the truth about why she so desperately wanted to get out. It's clear she did not want to be there. He abducted her. It's 100% his fault.

Whether or not she had previously travelled with him voluntarily has nothing to do with it.

Legally it is difficult because he is not considered responsible for her injuries in the sense that he physically caused them. However, they were sustained as she was trying to escape from a situation where he was holding her against her will and may have threatened her harm. He was indirectly responsible, even if he didn't directly cause them, but I'm not sure there is a legal precedent for that.

[quote HeadPain]**@Lockheart* "Yes, it is the attorney general's office which reviews sentences referred under the unduly lenient rules."*

Thanks. Do you know the maximum it can be increased to?[/quote]
I've checked the sentencing guidelines and perverting the course of justice does carry a maximum sentence of life, so I was wrong in my initial assumption. Therefore in theory he could be given life on the basis of that conviction alone however that will be extremely dependant on the nature of the offence and I can't find the judges sentencing remarks.

When sentencing, the judge will have starting points depending under what section of what act the defendant is convicted of, so a life sentence may never be in play. They may have to start with a sentence of say, 5 years, and then add or subtract time to account for other factors.

The judges rationale for the sentence passed down will be scrutinised and the AG office will decide whether or not their logic was appropriate.

Nobody jumps from a van travelling that fast unless they fear for their life so those thugs are responsible even if she did jump.

Let's face it, even if he had been convicted of murder, he probably wouldn't have got much longer.

@Thatsplentyjack

Let's face it, even if he had been convicted of murder, he probably wouldn't have got much longer.

Murder committed by someone aged 18-20 has a starting point of 15 years for the least serious cases, so you are very wrong on that score.

That’s murder in anyone’s book!!! The sentence is a joke- an unfunny joke!

Even if she DID jump rather then being pushed how frightened must she have been to do that. You could say that the poor people who jumped from the towers on 911 were suicides on that basis
I appreciate it’s about what can be actually proven but he should have received the maximum sentence possible for what he has been convicted of
And his family sound like scum too

It's horrific, but the jury must not have been sure she was pushed out of the van. It is good that the sentencing is being reviewed. This young woman stood no chance against this thug. I've seen the CCTV of her abduction. She was lifted bodily with her arms pinned to her side.

@Lockheart "The judges rationale for the sentence passed down will be scrutinised and the AG office will decide whether or not their logic was appropriate."

And then what happens if they decide it was not appropriate? (If you don't mind answering)