So it is "justice".......or is this just The Sun trying to sell more papers??

[FAQ]

Steven Bigby the man stabbed to death in Oxford Street the other day.

compared to the BBC report

so was it "justice" - or is the sun trying to sell more papers?

oh daer wish i hadnt opened that link now

If he did what he was accused of, I can't feel any pity for him. But I don't think street justice is the way forward.

I have shed tears over the death of Jimmy Mizen and his parents' strength and the beautiful way they spoke of him. This seems - well, very different.

Well he did mean that. Sorta. And he has a point.

But, I feel no less angry about the whole thing really. If he'd been on remand he'd not be dead now, that's for sure.

But I still don't understand why he wasn't on remand? Is an accusation of gang rape, acid throwing and separately stabbing not enough to get one locked up as a possible danger to society while awaiting trial?

Seriously does anyone know?

I am a tad worried now. I thought when people were prosecuted for this stuff they were kept away from offending further. This is making me re-evaluate how I understood the criminal justice system to work entirely.

Help I am scared now!!

Thanks VVVQV! I wasn't trivialising anything, esp. a rape allegation, and I haven't used the word "just". I'm sorry if there was a confusion there.

yes, in Panworld he would have been remanded in custody on the rape charge in view of other concerns. I can't believe these were the only issues he has in his antecendence, and v. probably has issues of not previously adhering to court decisions.

Moreover, there ARE people incarcerated, that I am aware of, who's space at her majesty's pleasure could more usefully been occupied by others against whom more serious charges and convictions have been brought before courts.

ok. the man who rapde me had already served time for anohter rpe previuosly plus other offences.so yes it is alla laod of crap.

I really think the system here has to take rape and sexual assault more seriously. At the moment there are no convictions to speak of and apparently raping someone and pouring acid over them is not enough to draw the attention of the authorities.

Iwillnot you must feel absolutely sick about what has happened. Why they let these men out to wander around is a mystery to me. I really feel for you. Really, you were so brave to report it etc. I never did.

What can we do about it?

Well briefly this govt IS doing something about it!
Action hinges on what we consider as a "risk of serious harm". This has a defintion under the Crim Justice Act 2003, and is now being used to determine who now presents such a risk, rather than simply a 'risk of re-offending'. Why now, you may ask? This is to do with the fact that we have a prison population that is at 82,000 or so, and a recognition that we are possibly locking up the wrong people for too long!

Yes the 'system' is hardly a system, as this implies a consistency that isn't evident. We have hugh numbers of people serving very short sentences, clogging up the resources which should be being used to deal with people who DO represent that real risk of serious harm.

This case has upset me so much I googled for more info to get a timeline

He was charged with grievous bodily harm and violent disorder over the 2006 stabbing of the man in Southgate.

He had been charged in January, along with nine others, over the rape... The decision to free Bigby on bail after the rape charge came six months after he was bailed for the gang knifing.

Detectives say they believe the attack in Oxford Street was a "spontaneous" incident sparked after Bigby threw a cup of water over four men outside the McDonald's. However, they are also investigating the possibility that he was targeted by a rival gang in retaliation for the rape or the gang attack.

If he was guilty as charged, that quick death was too good for him.

No. Even if he was guilty, (and we don't know one way or another), two wrongs don't make a right.

What kind of society would it be where we consider it acceptable to go around killing people who have done bad unto others?

Not intending to advocate vigilanteism - agree that is wrong.

But at the same time if guilty of such horrendous attacks I would wish a painful death on the perpetrator. But would not inflict it.

Im sorry but this fucking government is a mamby pamby load of shite.

violent crime and chraged with it? Lock em up until the trial.

Karma? Good.

But this isn't some vigilante at work, he was killed because he thew a drink over someone.
I doubt the person who killed him would give two hoots for the girl who was raped and burned.
It is not justice, karma maybe but definitely not justice.

I bet the girls parents think its justice

if you're happy for vigilante justice to be taken against people who have been proven guilty of no crime then so be it, we may as well go back to salem.
i can't in any sense of the word call this "justice" even if he is guilty of his alleged crime such acts can not be condoned. while it would be understandable for a relative/the victim/or close friend of the victim to take such measures there is no indication that this killing had any relation to the other crime.

I am less interested in how or why Bigby died than in why was he released on bail, when high profile idiots like Blake Fielder Winehouse apparantly was not? However much contempt you have for the latter he is hardly on the same scale of threat to society!

"when high profile idiots like Blake Fielder Winehouse apparantly was not?"

because there was a high risk of Blake fielder etc to re-offend and tamper with his trial again. he is in there awaiting trial for perverting the course of justice by bribing witnesses. obviously there was sufficient evidence presented to the court which suggested he was likely to A) not show up for trial B) attempt to tamper with evidence/jury members or witnesses again.

meant to also say not knowing the facts of the alleged offences by the deceased, i can only assume that the court was satisfied that he would not abscond or re-offend causing serious harm

The risk of Prisoner A inflicting grievious bodily harm and/or rape to me is far more serious than the risk that Prisoner B might attempt to bribe witnesses or run away.

Christ, the court was satisfied that someone accused of participating in a gang rape and torture of a teenage girl would not be at risk of re-offending causing serious harm? Blimey. He must have had a good solicitor. Does that mean all the other accused are out on the street as well while they await trial?

Who is Blake Fielder Winehouse?

Yes but he has rights you know. Fuck the rights of the girl he alledgedly raped.

He wasnt an innocent bystander either. He was in a gang and threw a drink over another gang member inciting chaos imo.

He sounds like a scumbag.

if it was just a rival gang attack

there is no link

and therefore justice has fuck all to do with it

if however the girls family had done it - i might feel differently.

there are right things and wrong things even in the criminal world -

i know someone wh got their fingers broken for stealing after he clearly stole but didn't get sent down on a technicality.

i think that there is a huge philasophical leap from criminals who dish out their own justice - to other criminals

and vigilante mobs and witch hunts

huuuuuuuuuuuge leap there.

the former has happened forever

Yes, sod it, let's just lock up everyone who's accused of any serious offence before they're even tried, let alone convicted.

Let's never mind the fact that over 90% of people who're accused of any serious crime actually don't end up being convicted and we'd therefore be locking up innocent people.

Let's never mind the fact that 25% of those who're on remand are found to be subsequently found innocent at trial and we are already locking up innocent people.

Let's never mind the fact that the principle of innocent until provent guilty is actually the cornerstone of a modern democratic society.

Let's never mind the fact that we already have the highest prison population per capita in Western Europe (and in fact higher than states like Libya and Turkey)

Let's never mind the fact that over-crowding in some prisons is at over 180% and that the number of suicides in prison steadily over the last 10 years.

Instead, let's just read the tabloid crap, assume it all to be true, assume that this guy because he's black and a gang member is guilty of whatever crime he's charged with and just lock him up until the courts confirm it. Job done.

Can't believe he was bailed AGAIN. Blimey, if you are already on bail wrt one very serious charge of violent crime and you are charged with another even more serious charge, you'd reasonably expect to be remanded, wouldn't you? Why can't we ship the petty criminals out to make room for people who are an obvious danger to the public?

I am aware of serious overcrowding in the prisons.

I also agree with the notion of innocent until proven guilty.

I still think it reasonable to expect someone bailed for a serious offence to be RIC when charged with a further serious offence.