ROLF HARRIS SENTENCE

[donnie]

Is just about to be announced. It has now been revealed that he was also initially charged with viewing child pornography images and visiting child porn sites , as well as the sexual assault charges, but his lawyers successfully had these charges dropped as they would 'infect the case'. Sorry, not able to cut and past but it's on the Guardian website.

Gosh five years and he will probably serve two. Mind you not sure there is an appropriate length for someone who is not in the least bit remorseful.

That is an insultingly short sentence, but I strongly suspect that he won't live it out.

Loose women is appalling when it comes to discussing rape. It's a disgrace to women that bloody program!!

Me too tucson

I don't think wishing assault on this man is helpful tbh. The criminal justice system is meant to be justice for the crime committed. Once he's jailed that's the punishment. He shouldn't also be assaulted by inmates.

You wouldn't condone violence in the street, so why would it be OK in prison?

I wouldnt call it justice

Vigilatism certainly isn't justice is it? In or out of prison.

Misstired, it might not be the result you hoped for but we don't get to select or reject verdicts and sentences.

Sentencing for this type of crime is woefully inadequate.
Nearly 20 years ago, the man who abused my daughter from the ages of 5 through to 9 was given 15 months in light of his guilty plea, and the police told me it was an excellent result. But to be fair, I don't think any sentence would have been long enough for me at that time

He deserves much more but it is more than I thought might happen. He had to be sentenced according to the laws at the time of the offences, not the time of the trial. If this was reported now then the judge would have stronger powers to sentence him for longer.
Personanly I think the system is crap to allow that to happen.

It's much more than I was expecting, sentencing for sexual assault is massively inadequate.

I'm more horrified that defense requested his looking at child abuse images was not applicable because it would infect the case. As if they didn't want it to prejudice the jury in deciding whether RH had committed assault. Er, he was a paedophile. Looking at child pornography was massively relevant. I know that's not why it was separated, and investigating it would have delayed matters, that comment just made my blood boil.

It's been referred for reconsideration under an inadequate sentence protocol or somesuch apparently.

Lots of 'mitigating' factors apparently hmm which RH's barrister only informed the Judge about this morning [shock. That doesn't sound like acceptable practice to me?

It's the normal practice. Obviously you're not going to start talking about mitigation till the person has been convicted. But most of the information referred to came out during the evidence anyway.

I suspect the judge's hands may be tied to an extent. There are limits to the circumstances when courts are permitted to make sentences consecutive rather than concurrent, and the judge has to sentence in accordance with the law at the time rather than what it is now - as we know. at the relevant time there was a generally more lax attitude to this type of offence. Also it may be that the maximum sentence is reserved for more extreme types of abuse, and I'm sure we can all work out what those might be; and he does have to take into account Harris' age.

Referral to Attourney General

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/jul/04/rolf-harris-jail-sentence-review-attorney-general

Disgusting slimy man. I am Australian and grew up watching him on TV on a Sunday evening along with Disneyland. It all seems tarnished now.

I am not surprised at Pam St Clement's comments, there seem to be so many abuse apologists around; the other day some roving news reporters asked Ronnie Corbett and also Cilla Black what they thought about RH being found guilty and both of them expressed shock and disappointment, the implication being that he couldn't be guilty as he was 'such a nice fella' .

Did anyone ask her if the 7 year old girl 'threw herself' at RH? she should be forced to answer for her comments. IMO.

I was in hospital long term in the 70’s. Got a card and badge from J.Savile, no less. Just thinking about that today in light of RH case. Honestly, I was thrilled to bits with the card etc at the time 'cos JS was such a celeb. I can totally understand how a lot of these cases were not reported at the time. They were such "nice blokes". Yuk.

Will he be deported when he gets out of prison?

5 years and 4 months doesn't sound much, but given his age, realistically it could well mean he dies behind bars, unredeemed. (which is no more than the sleazy pervert deserves). I just wish they'd done the same with the revolting Savile before he died.

How do you think he will fare in prison? Will he be well treated and 'looked after' by the guards and other inmates or at risk of violence because of the nature of his crimes?

lowcarbforthewin: " Looking at child pornography was massively relevant. I know that's not why it was separated, and investigating it would have delayed matters, that comment just made my blood boil."

That upset me too. Imagine if the jury had found him not guilty. It's absolutely chilling. Apparently the defence had an argument that, to prepare the defence on downloading child pornography, they would have to spend several months establishing whether the girls in the pictures were underage or not, thus delaying the trial. Rather than delay the trial the judge decided not to include the child pornography charges.

Our justice system is crazy.

I believe he is a British Citizen and therefore could not be deported unless he were to have his citizenship revoked.