Andrew Gilbart QC, made clear why he was disregarding sentencing guidelines when he said "the offences of the night of 9 August … takes them completely outside the usual context of criminality".
"The principal purpose is that the courts should show that outbursts of criminal behaviour like this will be and must be met with sentences longer than they would be if the offences had been committed in isolation," he said. "For those reasons, I consider that the sentencing guidelines for specific offences are of much less weight in the context of the current case, and can properly be departed from."
Regardless of the severity of the offences before the court, this statement is the epitome of arsehole justice. Nothing takes a specific offence out of the usual context of criminality. Proportionality is one of the fundamental principles of British justice. There may be aggravating or mitigating factors to consider, but the sentencing guidelines allow for this. You simply cannot throw out the sentencing guidelines and expect to deliver justice. Also, judge, please be aware that the principal purpose of courts is to protect the innocent not to make examples of people. I'm sure you will be familiar with Blackstone's formulation which tells us that it is better that ten guilty are set free than one innocent suffers. Andrew Gilbart QC, you are quite possibly an arsehole. The jury is still out on that one, but there's no question that this is a clear case of Arsehole Justice.
[NB - Read the rest of that article. David Cameron supports these harsh sentences. Some dude will probably go to prison for stealing an ice cream cone. Arseholes!]
Gilbart didn't have to publish his sentencing reasons and remarks and it was a step forward that he did.
ReplyDeleteThere needs to be a sense of proportion in these riot sentences. It does seem that has been lost but may be recovered in the appeal courts.
www.callitjustice.net
Judges do need to explain why they depart from the sentencing guidelines. See here: http://www.justice.gov.uk/news/features/feature170811b.htm. I find Gilbart's suggestion that events can take an offence "completely outside the usual context of criminality" to be ridiculous on its own face. I do appreciate however that he helped to compile a set of amended guidelines specific to the riot cases.
ReplyDelete