Can the old get away with murder? - Page 2

garinda · 29-01-2008, 18:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by jambutty

Good luck to the old geezer. He showed up what a pretentious load of prats the so called art experts are.

Although this case is quite amusing, that's really not the point. A younger person would've been serving a custodial sentence for this crime of fraud.

Should older people, say those guilty of serious sex crimes, also be exempt from prison, because of their age?

jambutty · 29-01-2008, 18:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by garinda

Although the story is quite amusing, would an eighty four year old child molester, who was suffering ill health, also be spared the jail sentence a younger man would have to serve?

You can’t equate George Greenhalgh with a child molester.

A child molester of any age or sex needs putting away for life regardless of his/her health. Throwing away the key would help too.

garinda · 29-01-2008, 19:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by jambutty

You can’t equate George Greenhalgh with a child molester.

A child molester of any age or sex needs putting away for life regardless of his/her health. Throwing away the key would help too.

I thought we were all supposed to be equal before the law?

The crime is really irrelevant.

This man was spared a jail sentence because of his age.

So we let off an eighty four year old for fraud. Where do we draw the line? Which crimes should the elderly be exempt from serving a custodial sentence for?

Kidnapping, child molestation, or is it ok as long as it is a 'victimless crime', which a younger person would serve a gaol sentence for?

jambutty · 29-01-2008, 19:04

They banged up Ronnie Biggs because his crime was against the royalty in the form of Royal Mail train that he robbed. If he had just robbed an armoured car or a bank I doubt very much if they would have thrown the book at him and his cohorts.

The Chairman of Guinness was a “captain of industry” and thus well in with the ‘establishment’.

Pinochet was a friend of Maggies.

Just been announced that the guys who stole £53M whilst threatening people with guns got a minimum of 15 years each.

However to answer the question, age should have nothing to do with the type of sentence. The severity of the crime should be the sole yardstick for handing down a sentence and not whom the crime was committed against.

derekgas · 29-01-2008, 19:09

I wouldn't be too happy if my council bill had to cover that. (quote)

I wouldn't be happy if they paid that for the real thing, let alone a fake, just goes to show how stupid councils and government can be with our money!

jambutty · 29-01-2008, 19:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by garinda

I thought we were all supposed to be equal before the law?

The crime is really irrelevant.

This man was spared a jail sentence because of his age.

So we let off an eighty four year old for fraud. Where do we draw the line? Which crimes should the elderly be exempt from serving a custodial sentence for?

Kidnapping, child molestation, or is it ok as long as it is a 'victimless crime', which a younger person would serve a gaol sentence for?

We are but some are more equal than others whether you are the criminal or the victim.

No he wasn’t spared a jail sentence and he wasn’t let off either. His sentence was a 2 years jail sentence suspended because, as was reported, the judge contacted all the jails to see if they could accommodate an 84 years old. None of them could so he took the only option open to him. Don’t forget the "Artful Codger" and hid family were ordered to pay back £400,000 and I understand that there are moves to get more back from them.

As has already been pointed out, the victims in this case were the pseudo art intellectuals and it took them SEVENTEEN YEARS to discover that they had been duped. The Bolton Council should sue the ‘expert’ who verified the statue as genuine.

No crime is victimless. In any case why bring the highly emotive issue of child molesters into the debate? Or are you, as usual, just trying to stir things up a bit.

steeljack · 29-01-2008, 19:26

bit of a sidebar , nasty old git gets into a spot of trouble on an ASDA car park
'Victor Meldrew' pensioner, 75, banned from Asda after head-butting trolley pusher | the Daily Mail
and 'they' have the nerve to complain about the young

garinda · 29-01-2008, 19:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by jambutty

We are but some are more equal than others whether you are the criminal or the victim.

No he wasn’t spared a jail sentence and he wasn’t let off either. His sentence was a 2 years jail sentence suspended because, as was reported, the judge contacted all the jails to see if they could accommodate an 84 years old. None of them could so he took the only option open to him. Don’t forget the "Artful Codger" and hid family were ordered to pay back £400,000 and I understand that there are moves to get more back from them.

As has already been pointed out, the victims in this case were the pseudo art intellectuals and it took them SEVENTEEN YEARS to discover that they had been duped. The Bolton Council should sue the ‘expert’ who verified the statue as genuine.

No crime is victimless. In any case why bring the highly emotive issue of child molesters into the debate? Or are you, as usual, just trying to stir things up a bit.

He was excused a custodial sentence because of the frailties of age, the crime is irrelevant.

What crimes should this be the norm for? You think it is acceptable for fraud, how about murder?

This isn't about an art fraud, it's about the principle of equality for all before the law.

Should the disabled, or educationally subnormal, also be excused jail, because the prison service can't accommodate them?

jambutty · 29-01-2008, 19:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by garinda

He was excused a custodial sentence because of the frailties of age, the crime is irrelevant.

What crimes should this be the norm for? You think it is acceptable for fraud, how about murder?

This isn't about an art fraud, it's about the principle of equality for all before the law.

Should the disabled, or educationally subnormal, also be excused jail, because the prison service can't accommodate them?

No he wasn’t. Read the article. Here let me save you the bother.

Quote:

Judge William Morris adjourned the case at Bolton crown court this month to ask if any jails could "humanely" imprison a wheelchair-bound pensioner suffering from poor health. Today the judge told the court that the prison service could not look after Greenhalgh humanely because of his age and infirmity - otherwise he would be going to prison.

His age and infirmity was only relevant because no jail could accommodate him humanely.

At least the judge had the good sense to find out before passing sentence. No doubt he would have arrived at the same decision had the criminal been 36, in poor health and in a wheelchair.

If a prison cannot cater for a disabled or educationally subnormal person humanely then an alternative punishment has to be handed down.

Do you really know what you are talking about? You state that “the crime is irrelevant” and then turn right around and boldly ask about the type of crime.

garinda · 29-01-2008, 20:05

So you're are saying that a man, the same age as the man in question, and of similar fraility, should be excused jail because of their health, regardless of the crime?

Sounds like carte blanche for the elderly to do what they want.

Lets just hope the streets don't fill up with boozed up pensioners knocking down little kids, happy in the knowledge that they'll never get banged up.

shillelagh · 29-01-2008, 20:19

Would you still be saying that jambutty if you lived in bolton and it was your poll tax that had gone to pay for the statue?

If you cant do the time dont do the crime....

West Ender · 29-01-2008, 20:43

No, sorry, you can't equate an art fraud with child molesting on the scale of injury to the person, outrage of morality or evil intent. Having said that, the severity of sentencing often seems to be at the whim of the judge and we have all heard of child molesters who have been treated shockingly leniently and persons involved with the Great God Money who have received long prison stretches.

This guy and his son committed fraud, of that there is no doubt, but their worst crime, from the Art Establishment's point of view, must be that the latter have been made to look like incompetent fools. That is dreadful - true but dreadful.

I've no doubt the old man would have gone to prison if it had been easy to find a place. At the back of my mind, however, I'm thinking - if he could fool people by lying about his "finds", why not about the wheelchair? Does he jump out of it every night and dance round that garden shed? Makes you wonder.

cashman · 29-01-2008, 20:47

i wondered same as you, especially when i heard the cheeky old git mutter coming out of court to the taxi.

Acrylic-bob · 29-01-2008, 20:52

When it comes to art and municipal authorities, I think you'll find that council's in the past have chucked away an awful lot more public money for a lot less. And we all know that is a situation which is not going to change anytime soon. At least the forgery has brought to prominence a real craftsman. And, considering the Ronnie Biggs comment, at least in this case no one was hurt.

garinda · 29-01-2008, 21:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by West Ender

No, sorry, you can't equate an art fraud with child molesting on the scale of injury to the person, outrage of morality or evil intent.

But you can. Legally, and hopefully, both art fraud and child molestation would result in a custodial sentence.

Why should one crime be exempt from a jail sentence, for those elderly people of a frail disposition, and the other not?