16 Months For Charlie Gilmour (Student Fees Demo)

[LemonDifficult]

I wasn't very sympathetic to the rioters but 16 months seems a long time to put someone this young away for. Ridiculous. He'll get the fright of his life in the first few weeks and then what? What's the point of all those extra months - at tax payers expense.

I guess he won't do the full term, but still. It seems crazy.

Edward Woollard was sentenced to 32 months for throwing a fire extinguisher from a roof during a demo - with far worse potential effects than Gilmour's actions. Useless putting Gilmour in jail, don't think he was actually violent as opposed to insulting the memory of those commemorated at the Cenotaph and doing a lot of shouting. IMO he should be doing community service among the have-nots.

It smacks of ...do not protest against the government to me

A local thug - a real thug, aged 30, with previous (amongst other things, aged 18 he bit two men in a fight and was sent to a Young Offender Institute for three years) - got 18 months for beating up his former girlfriend.

"A ?prolonged? ordeal of dragging, kicking, punching and squeezing until she was unconscious, shouting ?I?m going to kill you? & throwing furniture at her. At the time of the offence, he was on bail for previously attacking the ex in front of their four-year-old daughter."

Yep, swinging on a flag, throwing a bin & sitting on a car definitely equates to that.

Hes a raving idiot, who cares.

Is he?

Ponders is dead right.

Chipstick, I for one care because 16 months at taxpayers expense is a hell of a lot to pay in austere times for a few acts of drunken idiocy.

At the risk of being cliched, I simply say don't do the crime if you can't do the time.

It is not that this sentence is too hard, more that other sentences are too soft.

Lol at have nots.

Cave Mum - 'the time' is not free, it's at our expense. There's a point where a punishment is more costly to society than it's worth. 16 months for Charlie Gilmour is not best use of resources.

Ponders, that's disgraceful. Poor woman.

But hey, what does her suffering matter when the courts have Camilla looking a bit shocked to worry about...

it is a bit of a side comment but it seems that often people arguing for longer sentences are the same demanding lower taxes, so how to fund it? where should the money be taken from?

it is a bit like what is going on in California but I digress, as you were

So should we stop sending anyone to prison because it costs money? The whole point of a prison sentence is to deter people from commiting a crime. If we stop sending people to prison what deterrent do we have against crime?

If we made prisoners "pay their way" whilst in prison, ie working for the state be it making goods for sale, tending a farm, etc perhaps people wouldn't complain about the cost of keeping people in prison.

Wont somebody think of the children deficit royals

what jobs could they do that would pay not only for their clothing, food, heating, medical care, salaries of staff, and rent(& building prisons for more offenders)?
I think jail is necessary to remove people from society but we should be careful in thinking about tariffs. I am not sure it is much of a deterrent in most cases tbh
not all laws are that carefully thought through

No no no 'Cavemum'. The point of prison should be to remove people if they are a danger to society. It is very expensive to have dedicated facilities and to guard every prisoner and meet their every need.

Otherwise, 'safe' criminals should be repaying their debts to society and making amends through community service. I understand this also has a lower risk of reoffending.

not arguing to abolish prisons but perhaps a good idea to discuss funding, same for health, care homes, schools etc
money does not magically appear just because it is right and proper that they should exist

Oh I see Ponders.
If one works with 'vulnerable adults' and/or people with learning disabilities one can't possibly be anything other than positively saintly eh?

How patronising.

he didn't "disrespect the dead" - he swung off a flag on the Cenotaph

None of which exactly tallies with niceguy's DM-esque description

Well obviously the judge disagrees with your view as he actually said "You have shown disrespect to those who gave the ultimate sacrifice, to those who fell defending this country."

Wasn't trying to be like the DM at all.

he threw 2 sticks at police (who were in riot gear)
Oh well that's ok then. I guess tonight I'll go and try and stab a couple of policemen?.i mean after all they're wearing body armour! That must make my actions legitimate then?.

This is an attack on our right to protest, and on students
At the end of the day, the guy stepped over the line. Way over the line. I totally support the right to PEACEFUL protest but he should have been intelligent enough to realise that his actions may have led to prison.

I am glad that this lad was taken to court and prison was an option but I agree with all of those who say it's a waste of prison resources.

Hardened crims who abuse daily, commit regular crime and get court once will get a lesser sentence because sentencing seems to reflect the judges personal afront rather than fairness.

A judge faced with a nasty bit of work who is a regular before him will dish out a half hearted sentence knowing the nasty bit of work will go back to whatever place he lived and terrorised previously.

Faced with a woman doing the same crime or a posh lad.......... wow. Hell hath no fury like a judge who thinks he could have been affected by this crime!

So, hoping the govt now crack down on and imprison every singke drunken thug in every single town centre at night now. Then it will be safe to walk the streets.
And then start on the estates.

Ah.
It's all class war by stealth eh?
[hmmm]

Doubt it cos CG is rich n posh.

I have no comment on the appropriateness of the sentence, but I am irritated by the headlines about David Gilmour's "ADOPTED" son being put away. If DG consider's Charlie a son then Charlie is his son, adopted or not is minor background info, not something to put in the headlines. Or are we all being invited to ponder on the lack of associated guilt of DG by not having the same "tainted blood"?

NB: am not adopted myself nor are DC or even any of my close relatives

I haven't read the whole thread but I really really wish people would stop saying that this is too harsh because x and y don't get this sort of sentence. it's two separate issues. If the other sentences are too low then that needs to be tackled. You don't downgrade everything else to fit in.