Judges told to delay sentencing of men who abuse, assault and rape women.

[TooBigForMyBoots]

Our record for prosecuting male VAGW has always been poor. It's got worse. But this^. Fucking this^ is too much.

I don't know if you know how difficult and traumatic it is for a woman to get to the point where the man who assaulted her gets brought to court. Its fucking nasty, prolonged and painful.

A tiny minority of cases get to court. If they do, the victim can be subjected to domination and mind fuck at the hands of the defence team, while the man doesn't have to say anything.

Sometimes, not very often, a jury convicts a rapist. Justice is served and a danger to women is off the streets.

Not in 2023 UK. Oh no, we bail the rapist. Keep him in the community. Hopefully he'll be jailed later. But not today. How much damage can he do? To people who matter?

I am so angry that once again, victims of VAWG are not important enough to have justice and be protected.

Have you got a link to somewhere we can read about this? What's the reason they're told to delay sentencing?

Here
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/law/2023/oct/12/england-and-wales-judges-told-not-to-jail-criminals-because-prisons-full-report

The Times broke the story but I don't have a Share Token.

Thanks. So prisons are full, that's the reason.

And it's only guidance not policy. And it's only for criminals who have already been assessed as low risk.

One anonymous judge has interpreted this to mean that maybe there might be some circumstances where it applies to a rapist.

This is FWR @VoodooQualities . Maybe your minimising shite works elsewhere. I know what sex based violence does to women. I know what the "justice" process does to victims. I know that low risk means not a risk to men fuck all.

This is shit. Rapists should be locked up as soon as it's possible to do so.

I know those things too, but I believe you're getting too angry over something that's hearsay and certainly being reported in a sensationalist way.

And even if it's all true, it's being done because prisons are full. As a temporary measure while the government sorts that problem out. Not because anyone wants to let bad men off without punishment, nor because anyone believes crimes against women aren't serious.

If you are woman, be very afraid. This is what 13 years of conservative rule has done to the justice system. Some users screech about the definition of a woman where eventually rationality will return and people will revert to natural sex as as the definition whereas in reality some buzzword has made many forget the reality. A man can rape you and escape prison because the conservatives have bled dry our public finances including the justice system.

Too angry? I'm beyond angry.

I know what women go through and sacrifice to get a Guilty verdict on their assailant. The least we can do as a society is get them in jail asap, so the victim can breathe again. Feel safe, knowing he is locked up. Give the women space to deal with what has happened to them.

This is not hearsay. It's Government guidance to judges. And its a slap in the face to victims of VAWG.

Sentencing has gotten worse under tories and they have destroyed the justice system.

All right then, I'll leave this alone. It's not government guidance though. The article you posted makes it quite clear where the discussion allegedly took place and quotes a 'government source' (whatever that means) specifically saying that.

@Floppyelf I'll get angry at the government tomorrow. Right now I'm angry that women's suffering is taken for granted and so readily dismissed that even the men found guilty are free to walk amongst us.

And reoffend again if they want to before they're put away.

This would not have been put forward if it was mainly men that were raped.

It's the government's fault. They've cut funding to every piece of the crime prosecution ecosystem.

I don't understand why you're minimising this, it's a sign of serious problems.

Can't they release some people early who have only committed non violent crimes?

Sentence is based on a number of factors.
The offence is one of them. But someone with a 20 year record of non-violent offending may get the jail while someone with their first assault conviction "gets off" (in reality a suspended sentence is still a sentence).

I suggest everyone actually tries sitting in court for a few days to see the reality, not the Daily Mail-style hysteria

I've been in court, my ex got a 12 month suspended sentence yet there are people in prison for theft?

THIS.

Why are women and girls continually being failed??

The Guardians take on it… https://www.theguardian.com/comment is free/2023/oct/13/rivers-crumbling-schools-prisons-rapists-burglars-jails-politicians

I've sat in courts. Plenty of them and watched men walk out. But for them to be found guilty and still walk oi? Fuck that.!