Low sentence for Eton student **Title edited by MNHQ**

[winkywinkola]

I was utterly amazed to read how this man has got away with such disturbing behaviour. Unbelievable.

Apparently the judge found the images so disgusting he couldn't bring himself to deliver justice describe them. Wtf? Really? Why?

However, I've discovered there is a petition going around requesting a review of this sentence.]]

Signed.

I was utterly disgusted when I read about this.

Signed

It's because his wearhy family have paid for him to do rehabilitation programmes etc

I was under the impression that a Paedophile cannot be cured but in this instance his apparent remorse has justified him getting virtually off what amounts to very serious offences.

If he was a swarthy looking poor person then no doubt he would have got a more severe pu ishment.

Young, attractive and rich and a wealthy family to support him means he has been treated differently.

And I don't usually think that way at all but it does seem like it's true with this young man.

I've signed

The issue here is that if all those with the same crime as him got the same sentence as him, then fair enough but we all know if he'd been some kid from a council estate, he would have received a much tougher sentence, justice in this case hasn't been served.

Yes perhaps he is remorseful.

What if he decides that he can get away with it again? Because he has got away with it.

Just like all the others before him. Those others who were protected by the rich and powerful.

It will never end but by signing the petition, we do actually have some say.

What is also galling is how the judge talks of how this man's family have suffered.

Nothing compared to those children.

Are they all in it together? Seriously?

Signed.

It only needs 425 signatures.
Hopefully we can get them.

Yes of course they all have friends in high places.

If a man likes big busted blondes whipping him with celery then that's in his nature he ain't going to change it with rehab.

You can't rehab paedophiles- the re-offending rate is something horrendous like over 85% it makes me sick to think people but into the thought it is "curable"

Further deepens my suspicions that while they keep discovering more & more media members of this evil club, the ones in Govt & the law are just throwing them to the wolves to deflect investigations into the Establishment goings on.

Signed .

Honest to god. There was thread about this the other day which was deleted as it got way nasty. You know nothing of sentencing structures and rehabilitation being better than prison for such offenders. This would be his sentence even if he was a poor lad from a council scheme.

Anyone seen this update from the petition?

"28 Feb 2016 — It would appear that the media are busy removing articles relating to this heinous crime! Also information linking Picard (mums maiden name) to his top Westminster Lawyer father, why? your guess is as good as mine."

Daddy pulling strings amongst his buddies.......gah!

Coffee really ?

Daddy being a top lawyer had nothing to do with it?

Come off it.

Dory No it didn't. There was a barrister on the pulled thread who went through how the sentencing decision would be reached and said that was the correct sentence.

I appreciate I sound naive here but would his sentence have been stronger had he not been so privileged? I thought they were very lenient generally on these cases ( sadly)

I posted on the previous thread but it was deleted before I could catch up with whatever nastiness was posted. The last I saw was some poster proclaiming his all round general loveliness

I have signed the petition and I hope it generates a review.

Did the barrister posting on the previous thread have a posting history? Or did they just pop up on that thread?

Signed.

I am beyond disgusted and horrified!!

How can this be a just sentence? Money trumps all, hey??

Because we know that all judges follow the exact same formula & all criminals get the exact same sentence?

Bullshit.

It may technically have been the correct sentence but the whole issue of sentencing for these scum needs reviewing, it is disproportionate to the crime and the effects on the poor child victims, their families and the impact on society as a whole.

I don't even think a custodial sentence is always the answer, they get put in with other offenders & make contacts for when they get out. Another network.

Signed this needs a proper review immediately.

Oh we are so very ignorant. We don't understand the law.

Tosh.

There are big variations in sentences.

Why else is there the opportunity to ask for a review?

Well, let's inject into the discussion some information about the law and some hard facts, shall we? This is copied from prh47's post on another thread on this:

"As was pointed out on a previous thread about this story he has not been treated leniently compared to others convicted of these offences. You take the standard sentence for this crime from the sentencing manual, apply the standard reductions for age and pleading guilty (also from the sentencing manual) and you end up with the sentence he got. For most first offenders with these offences any custodial sentence will be suspended as there is very strong evidence that they are much less likely to reoffend if they receive appropriate treatment rather than going to prison.

Nothing to do with rich daddy, oh no

No, nothing to do with a rich daddy at all. Defendants from a deprived background faced with these charges receive exactly the same sentence. Search the internet for cases and you will find this is true despite your disbelief.

By all means campaign for a change to the sentencing guidelines so that everyone found guilty of these offences goes to prison. But don't claim this sentence is somehow to do with his background. It really isn't.

By the way, if you do launch such a campaign I won't be supporting you. The reoffending rate for these crimes is relatively low. But the evidence is that if we put all offenders in prison the reoffending rate is likely to go up by around 60%."

And maybe we can accept that people who actually work in this area of law might just know what they're talking about?

Signed. If it were up to me. He'd get at least 10 years. It's coming to something when people are getting thrown in jail because they can't psy their council tax, but a dirty disgusting peodophile like him is allowed to roam freely
.

The reoffending rate for convicted sex offenders is between 10 and 15%. Much lower for under 18s. A community sentence is not being "let off" or a slap on the wrist, there is a requirement to engage in specialist treatment work. The judge's reasoning does sound crap, but if you want to reduce the risk of reoffending prison is ineffective and community orders much more so, particularly for offences of this type.

Oh come on. Tax evaders aren't all thrown in prison. Google? Starbucks?