The Home Secretary is not telling the truth about rioters 'paying the price' ...

[jxpop665]

as it will be the choice of a jury whether or not the accused is found guilty. She is being a very dishonest politician pretending it is her choice.

There could be a significant situation as in the statue of Edward Colston case, that if sufficient people in a jury agree with the underlying motivations the jury may use jury equity to find the accused not guilty.

Given the purported motivation of failed immigration policy is a political issue for a significant proportion of the population, this is an unlikely be possible outcome.

YABU = The Home Secretary is right, they will pay the price.
YANBU = The Home Secretary should be honest as that choice is for a jury.

I know. If you read what I wrote I agree with you.

I was backing up what you said. I think? Had no sleep last night with sick baby GC so maybe I'm confused.

Hope the baby’s better soon. I think it was crossed wires.

Chuck out a few at the end of their sentences as the conservatives had already started putting into place and that'll make some space. A week or two earlier isn't going to make that much of a difference when there are new criminals to incarcerate and show justice being seen to be done.

I've just had 2 hrs kip, I feel worse than I did before. I think I might be turning into a zombie.

They will be keeping them in police cells until they start letting some out of prison early, think that's planned for next month. Total pain for police and station staff as the cells aren't really intended for long term use but it happens at times.

No, they said we were almost at capacity, and this is precisely why it is so important to have space available at all times.

No one can lie about capacity, it is a factual answer.

Night curfews and the army for less than 5000 people is absolute overkill.

150+ arrests already. People already coming in front of the courts and being charged. How on earth can people complain

This is terrorism and should be viewed as such.

Dictionary
Definitions from Oxford Languages · Learn more

terrorism

noun
the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians,

I reckon the majority will get a fine because there's no jail space .
I think the government should stop threatening people with ' they'll be sorry ' statements and get on and resolve this .

Resolve it how? They are working on the immigration issue and the only thing that would placate the far right is saying all immigration will be stopped tomorrow, which is impossible

That is resolving it. Making it abundantly clear that it won’t be tolerated is part of the strategy. Jail space will be found. Those rioters that have already appeared at court have been remanded without bail. I imagine the sentences will be sufficiently harsh to set an example and make people considering it think twice.

They'll be locked up. It will probably mean more over crowding and unpleasant conditions. But you don't get to set fire to buildings, threaten police officers and waltz off with a fine.

Surely it's absolutely obvious that she is saying that those found guilty will pay the price? She's hardly likely to go off into a long explanation of how those found not guilty won't pay any price because there's no price for them to pay, etc etc. I don't understand the point of your thread.

No, the population does not decide. We don't have a referendum on every sentencing decision. Magistrates or judges will decide primarily; if they plead not guilty and are sent to the Crown Court, juries also will decide. The chances of a jury being made of of sympathisers with these idiots who will therefore let them off are, frankly, infinitesimal.

There definitely needs to be a hard line on this. How long will these riots last? What will make it stop? How far could these muppets escalate things?

Based on past experience, they'll last while the weather's OK. Racist thugs tend to find something else to do when it gets colder and wetter.

Not so. He improved the rape conviction rate significantly.

People have this weird idea that those who support human rights think all criminals should be allowed to do whatever they like. That simply isn't the case. What they support is the use of due process, i.e. fair trials plus a police and prison service who obey the law. I wish Reform supporters would at least try to explain what on earth they think is wrong with that.

The law hasn't changed, in particular sentencing guidelines haven't changed. If these thugs they will get an easy ride because there's a new government, they've got some ugly shocks coming to them.

She said those found guilty will pay the price. You are talking about a situation where, very very theoretically, they might not be found guilty. In which case what she said won't apply to them, which is bloody obvious.

So what is supposed to be wrong with what the Home Secretary said?

I really really do hope that you’re right but I’m genuinely not confident 😞

@Proudtobeanortherner why?

Starmer was head of the CPS in 2011 and suspended bail, and made sure the idiots then were remanded in custody until such time as they were tried.

Anonymous are reporting all suspects arrested after the Sunderland riot have been remanded in custody after being charged

The government is addressing this by speeding up the process of dealing with illegal immigrants so that they can be deported more quickly. Given that, much as they would no doubt like it, we are not going to start shooting at children in boats in the Channel, the rioters must know if they put their minds to it that, one month in, there is not much more any government can do. So they are just rioting out of outright racism. Should we pander to that?

Those who have already appeared before the courts have been remanded without bail. I foresee some pretty harsh sentences coming from this.

Unless the new government have changed the sentencing guidelines (they haven't), then you have no reason not to be confident.

I am amazed at how little some people know about the legal processes in the UK.