The Tories - Page 5

jaysay · 19-05-2011, 17:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington

This man has a background in Law, so you would think he would have given a little more thought to the impact of his words.

He might have been trying to make the point that only 6% of rapes end in a conviction, but that was not the message the came across.....and after someone had said 'Rape is rape' to which he replied 'No. it's not'....he was lost, because he had alienated at least 50% of the population.

He is a pompous, self important, windbag....who cannot apologise, and he should be relieved of his post.

He did apologies, but he probably not the best choice of words in the first place, but as even a woman from Rape Crisis said this morning he was looking at the whole situation from the point of law, and that only 6% of rapists are convicted, a lot of rape cases fall down before they even get to court because the woman is to traumatised to testify, Clarke was saying that if more guilty pleas were made more people would go to jail, but something sure ain't right if the conviction rate is only 6%. Another aspect that should be looked at is the naming of suspect, be it be male or female, the name of people convicted of rape should only be in the public domain after the trial, not before, too many innocent men have had their names dragged through the mud for false accusation which is wrong, not only that but in most cases the woman isn't even named after a not guilty verdict which can't be right

walkinman221 · 19-05-2011, 18:02

Yes but even if they plead guilty why reduce their sentence, because they have spared their VICTIM the trauma of a court appearance pity they didnt think of their trauma whilst raping them.

jaysay · 19-05-2011, 18:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by walkinman221

Yes but even if they plead guilty why reduce their sentence, because they have spared their VICTIM the trauma of a court appearance pity they didnt think of their trauma whilst raping them.

Quite agree but better them behind bars for some time than walking away scott free, which the majority are doing at present

Wynonie Harris · 19-05-2011, 18:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaysay

Quite agree but better them behind bars for some time than walking away scott free, which the majority are doing at present

Here's a better idea...if they plead guilty they get the full sentence. If they plead innocent and are later found guilty, they get their sentence doubled.

jaysay · 19-05-2011, 18:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris

Here's a better idea...if they plead guilty they get the full sentence. If they plead innocent and are later found guilty, they get their sentence doubled.

We're then back to square one Wyn

cmonstanley · 19-05-2011, 18:38

rape is rape and everybody knows rapists usually rape again they should be getting longer sentences.this is the indefensible.theres a difference saying someone is a bigot than letting rapists out early

he should resign and be confined to the political scrapheap with his policy.

jaysay · 19-05-2011, 18:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmonstanley

rape is rape and everybody knows rapists usually rape again they should be getting longer sentences.this is the indefensible.theres a difference saying someone is a bigot than letting rapists out early

he should resign and be confined to the political scrapheap with his policy.

Another nhi post

Wynonie Harris · 19-05-2011, 18:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaysay

We're then back to square one Wyn

No, we're not...more offenders will plead guilty because they don't want their sentences doubling.

jaysay · 19-05-2011, 18:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris

No, we're not...more offenders will plead guilty because they don't want their sentences doubling.

there ain't going to be a sentence if there's no one to testify

Margaret Pilkington · 19-05-2011, 18:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris

Here's a better idea...if they plead guilty they get the full sentence. If they plead innocent and are later found guilty, they get their sentence doubled.

That is a good idea, but I have a better one....it just isn't suitable to put on a family site....but it involves a blunt knife and no anaesthetic....and I guess it would be very bloody.

John, I appreciate what he was trying to say......but that wasn't the message that was heard, and it was insensitively worded.It was like he was talking to some other man in a gentlemans bar room....and he sounded very dismissive of the woman who challenged his perceptions of rape.
Rape is always serious....and should be treated as such.
No one will ever say that there is a less serious murder....murder is murder......rape is rape.

Many women do not come forward because they feel, firstly, that they will not be believed, and secondly, they will have to suffer the humiliation and trauma of reliving those events.

Then on top of that, there has, in the past, been situations where the women bringing these cases have had their intimate personal lives picked over by barristers...almost as if they invited the sexual attack.....like somehow they were to blame.......the clothes they were wearing are discussed...etc.
When a woman says NO to sexual advances........it does mean NO......not maybe........it isn't just something a woman will do the enhance the chase, as some men believe.

The apology you talk of, was very muted and did not(in my opinion - for what that is worth) seem genuine.
It seemed to me to be more of a media salve to keep his lucrative post.

Wynonie Harris · 19-05-2011, 19:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaysay

there ain't going to be a sentence if there's no one to testify

Sorry, Jay, don't follow you. The last government tried to up the guilty pleas rate by halving the sentences of those who did so. Now Clarke's trying to up it even further by reducing the sentences to a third for guilty pleas. I'm saying let's do it the other way. Your sentence is lengthened if you plead guilty and are convicted. It's the same principle - you serve a shorter sentence for pleading guilty, thus encouraging such pleas, but you're still serving your full term.

Mancie · 19-05-2011, 22:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris

Sorry, Jay, don't follow you. The last government tried to up the guilty pleas rate by halving the sentences of those who did so. Now Clarke's trying to up it even further by reducing the sentences to a third for guilty pleas. I'm saying let's do it the other way. Your sentence is lengthened if you plead guilty and are convicted. It's the same principle - you serve a shorter sentence for pleading guilty, thus encouraging such pleas, but you're still serving your full term.

That's the way it used to be.. this is yet another in a long list of examples were this government have demanded cuts across the board... it is simply a cost cutting exercise and nothing more.
To make cuts "across the board" shows that this lot have not got a clue what should be done.. and so, same as usual, they simply make cuts with no real agenda for the future.. and hope things turn out ok... same old tories, same old policies

cashman · 19-05-2011, 22:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mancie

That's the way it used to be.. this is yet another in a long list of examples were this government have demanded cuts across the board... it is simply a cost cutting exercise and nothing more.
To make cuts "across the board" shows that this lot have not got a clue what should be done.. and so, same as usual, they simply make cuts with no real agenda for the future.. and hope things turn out ok... same old tories, same old policies

yeh nailed it in one.

cmonstanley · 19-05-2011, 22:30

yep just admitted it on question time

jaysay · 20-05-2011, 08:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by cashman

yeh nailed it in one.

Noted that on your quoted post that London's answer to Coco is still using the Same old Tories trip, maybe he hasn't stopped to think, that maybe its the same old Tories because as usual they're clearing up after same old Labour who can't run a bath never mind a country