4 yrs for cutting down tree, no jail time for rape

[Barnbrack]

Why are 2 men being given custodial sentences for cutting down a tree when men convicted of rape regularly get suspended sentences.

Is an important tree more important than a random woman! Justice system seems to think so.

why we have half sentences mystifies me.

It is at least partly because society is not prepared to build, fund, and staff the number of prisons that would be required.

There are about 100,000 people in prison in the UK. That could be very easily doubled if sentences weren't halved, and trebled if the courts worked better, and if some community sentences became custodial (sometimes I gasp when I see violent offenders getting 120 hours or whatever of graveyard gardening or whatever it is they do). But it would come at a phenomenal cost. Keeping someone in prison costs about £45,000 per year. So an extra 200,000 prisoners would be £9 billion. It's also not clear where the 50,000 or so prison officers that you'd need would come from - it's probably not many people's first choice of job.

At some point we need to face up to the fact that there are a hell of a lot of criminals out there. Over 12 million UK residents have a criminal record (about a third of men and 10% of women) and probably a million of those have been in prison at some stage. The UK already has one of the highest incarceration rates in Europe.

Do you think the idea that serious sexual assault carried a suspended sentence while people get a custodial sentence for cutting down a tree makes sense?

But you felt confident enough to (incorrectly) claim you knew about English sentencing guidelines in your original post? Maybe in future check you are correct before you spout your incorrect bullshit.

Did I? Did I mention England?

Well I don't think it's either or. I'm glad those men got 4 years.
I'd also like to see more men actually get convicted for the sexual assault and rapes they do.. then actually get proper time for it.

You said rape, not sexual assaults. Don’t twist your bullshit to try and prove a point that isn’t there.

No, you mentioned a conviction from the English courts, why would you be comparing that to sentencing guidelines in another country? That makes even less sense. Using your logic you might as well have said ‘is it right that the men who cut down the Sycamore tree got four years whereas convicted rapists often get stoned to death’

Totally batshit.

Not my intention, agree possibly poor wording.

You do seem massively upset by the suggestion sentencing for crimes against women should be higher than crimes against trees or property

How do I seem ‘massively upset’ exactly?

I actually think those comparisons are more proportionate

You've gone a bit sweaty and confrontational

I’ve been raped, and the trauma still affects me but I’ve found deep comfort and healing in nature. Trees, in particular, bring me peace - touching one can help calm my nervous system. They’re more than just beautiful; they clean our air and are essential to all life on Earth.
The individuals responsible for cutting down the sycamore tree needed to be held accountable to send a clear message that such acts won’t be tolerated
I fully support the sentence given. It sets an important precedent and raises awareness about the legal protections trees have, like TPOs, which too many people are unaware of. We must treat trees with the respect they deserve.

No, you're just flailing and, to deflect from your dimwittery, are insinuating that other people are somehow rape apopologists or supporters.

Pretty disgusting for you to use rape victims like that.

That’s not an answer.

I'm not sure whether or not I support the sentence for the tree felling as a stand alone sentence. I do think it's not in line with sentencing for other crimes.

I'm sorry you've been through that and glad you found solace in trees.

You asked why you seemed upset. That's why you seem upset

Sentences for rape are far too lenient.
At the same time 4 years for criminal damage is about right. Shame the sentence isn’t the same for all criminal damage.

It isn't though.

It's a bizarrely long sentence in the context of sentencing

You forgot the bit about them inciting violence and being racist.

The reason they got those sentences is because people lost their minds over a tree. I live in the North East. The way people went on about it was ridiculous. I am not condoning vandalism and yes the perpetrators should be punished. There is lot of vile vandalism near us including killing animals on allotments and arson. None of it is ever punished with substantial sentencing. It was a Sycamore probably one of the worst tree species there is. We had to have two cut down in our garden about ten years ago. One the stump was killed off. The other stump was not killed. The untreated stump is now a fully grown tree again.

Because I’m sweaty? Again, batshit.

@Barnbrack i think the problem isn’t that you are saying rape sentences are long enough or there are enough convictions or the whole damn thing is a shitshow because it is and it has been for awhile - I mean ffs marital rape only began illegal in 1991.

no it’s the implication that the sentence is actually too much for what they did - and it isn’t for me it is exactly what it should be

and the set of guidelines for both in terms of sentencing are quite separate

😂 typo meant sweary 😂 sorry I've no idea if you're sweating

No it's that it's out of proportion to other sentencing and therefore makes no sense.

Obviously it varies by area but as that was a 'National scandal' I'm not surprised they went down at all and I think they should have.

You're acting like 2 rapists have been let off so they can have the cells but we have no proof to suggest that at all.

Is sentencing for rape a joke in this country, yes. Absolutely. Does that mean other crimes should go unpunished? I don't think so.