Rehabilitation of Offenders

[vetran]

Its sad he can't work, yes he apparently did a bad thing (still not sure the conviction is totally valid) but as AtW said he has served his time as required.
But he needs to work and if this sort of vigilante behavior is not really acceptable.

[vwdan]

he has served his time as required.

How do you figure that out, then?

[vetran]

How do you figure that out, then?

he has been released on license, he is allowed to work subject to restrictions from his probation officer (note his probation officer IS NOT Twitter).

Therefore he has served his time as required.

[vwdan]

he has been released on license, he is allowed to work subject to restrictions from his probation officer (note his probation officer IS NOT Twitter).

Therefore he has served his time as required.

No, he hasn't. He has served half his time (Or whatever the exact maths may be) and has been gifted the privilege of serving the rest outside of prison on license. He his still a convicted criminal and is still within the justice system - to say he has served his time completed his punishment is a total misnomer.

[vetran]

No, he hasn't. He has served half his time (Or whatever the exact maths may be) and has been gifted the privilege of serving the rest outside of prison on license. He his still a convicted criminal and is still within the justice system - to say he has served his time completed his punishment is a total misnomer.

I didn't say that, I said he had served his time (within prison) as required and he is on license. He is in the rehabilitation part of the sentence.

This indignation isn't really helping. If you think sentences are too low or rehabilitation i wrong I suggest you approach the Justice department.

[vwdan]

I didn't say that, I said he had served his time (within prison) as required and he is on license. He is in the rehabilitation part of the sentence.

This indignation isn't really helping. If you think sentences are too low or rehabilitation i wrong I suggest you approach the Justice department.

Uh, no, you didn't add the "in prison" bit initially and just saying "He's served his time" implies somewhat strongly that his brush with the justice system is complete.

I've got no issue with his sentence - but I also have no issue with the general public pressuring a commercial football club with regards to hiring a convicted rapist who is still serving his sentence.

[vetran]

Uh, no, you didn't add the "in prison" bit initially and just saying "He's served his time" implies somewhat strongly that his brush with the justice system is complete.

I've got no issue with his sentence - but I also have no issue with the general public pressuring a commercial football club with regards to hiring a convicted rapist who is still serving his sentence.

Serving time is purely in prison so the extra is not needed, I have added it as you may not be aware.

What does SERVE TIME stand for?



If you have no issue with his sentence why do you believe he shouldn't work in his chosen and suitable position whilst on license as suggested and encouraged by the Probation service?

[vwdan]

If you have no issue with his sentence why do you believe he shouldn't work in his chosen and suitable position whilst on license as suggested and encouraged by the Probation service?

Because I don't think he deserves to, it's that simple. I'd not be able to simply resume my career if I raped someone, so you'll forgive me for having little sympathy for him.

I don't think this needs any kind of legislation (Though I believe the FA are looking at some clearer guidelines?) - public opinion is more than enough. Oldham were more than within their rights to sign him - but it would have been commercial stupid.

I don't think the implication of "served his time" is that simple - it still implies that his punishment is complete.

[sartois]

This whole case is pretty disturbing, and the mob seem to feel that they are justified because he hasn't shown remorse... which of course he cannot do if he is innocent as he claims to be.

The conviction seems to come down to his word against hers. He says that he asked and she consented... she says she can't remember. Since she says she can't remember the jury decided that she couldn't have consented. I just don't see how this is proof beyond a reasonable doubt that a rape occurred and if this is all that is needed for a conviction there would be a lot of young guys on a Friday and Saturday night that would be up on rape charges based on the amount of alcohol that gets consumed in the pubs/clubs.

What bugs me though is that rape is considered a more heinous crime than killing 2 boys whilst drinking and driving. Where was the mob when Luke McCormick was released from jail? Surely killing people is worse than rape regardless of how much remorse is shown. Of course Luke Mccormick is going to show remorse, as there clearly was no consent to those boys being killed and he was caught bang to rights...

Wonder what all these high profile politicians and media celebrities will say should the conviction be overturned....

[AtW]

How do you figure that out, then?

He was let out from jail, rather than escape it.