bLair told to Shut up!

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by spike7451, Jun 15, 2006.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. spike7451

    spike7451 RIP

    With all the media coverage over sentences give to criminals,particulary over the last few days,Lord Ramsbotham told BBC Radio's daily politics show "I wish he'd (bLair) shut up,frankly".

    Personally,I think the sentencing needs overhauling.I mean,crimes now are getting more violent & disturbing but when was the last time that the punishments were reflective of the crimes commited. The entire way that criminals are sentenced needs to be looked at.Useing overcrowding of the prison's is'nt & cannot be used as a excuse to let offenders out early or even given a reduced sentence.
    It beggars belief to me that a criminal can 'lose' a third of his sentence if he confesses early on!! :x
    (Jack Regan would be spinning in his grave!! :wink: )
    Over to you!
  2. Don't think there's much chance of Blair shutting up A lawyer on Newsnight last night said what was happening was the consequence of the laws passed, by this load of not very good lawyers in Parliament.She said they hadn't thought the new legislation through.The Judges are only following the guidelines put down by parliament Blair &Co are all talk what happened to the rounding up and deporting of foreign criminals?? A deathly silence
  3. Blair et al are hoist to the petard of their own interference in the manipulation of the laws of evidence within the Criminal Justice Act 2003 enacted to secure a greater number of convictions, by for example, allowing for the admissibility of heresay evidence.

    Sections 142 to 146 of the Act relate to sentencing - section 144 in particular deals with discounts for guilty pleas.

    It is unforgivable for the Home Secretary to attack the judiciary for doing nothing more than complying with statutory provisions and it is equally unforgivable that Charlie Falconer should simply say it is a fault of the 'system' when describing the effect of the very legislation he was instrumental, along with the Home Secretary for introducing in the first place.

    It is a sad indictment of the lack of thought involved in the law making process and it now falls upon Parliament to spend time repairing another botched job!

    New Labour have, since 1997 created more than 290 new criminal offences and we imprison more people in the United Kingdom per head of population than any other democratic country outside of the USA. The prison population now stands at nearly 80,000 people, including elderly ladies who cannot afford to pay for their television licences!

    Regards and best wishes

  4. As was stated on newsnight last night when a prisoner becomes eligible for parole the most amount of time they have to discuss these indivial cases is aprox 15 minutes
    Because they have loads of cases to access in such little time they have to decide whether they should be out on licence or not .
    Our government should give the probation services more resources and spend more time having prionsers Physiologically checked to decide whether they are not going to commit that kind of crime again
  5. This government, together with 'newspapers' like the scum, seem to be doing quite a lot of that lately. The last time they did this was re the asylum seekers. Now they are doing it again.

    I bet they are going to announce some kind of sentencing reform so that they appear 'tough on crime'. New labour are the experts on populist punitivism. They used the media panic caused by the Bulger incident to get to power and as I noted in another thread, New Labour has been introducing some new initiative or legislation to deal with crime almost every year since 1997. This at a time when crime rates have fallen and have continued to fall for more than a decade. :x
  6. Scabster_Mooch wrote
    This at a time when crime rates have fallen and have continued to fall for more than a decade. :x[/quote]

    Crime rates fallen?

    Or, is it just that people are reporting less crimes as they no longer have any confidence in a diminishing Police force that is unlikely to respond to any incident - other than just issueing a crime number, for insurance purposes.


    Edited several times (having just returned from Bath Ales Brewery visit). :twisted:
  7. I do beleive that Labour have a problem with Prisions. A Doctrine problem that goes back to their basic theology. Prisons are old Tory ways of dealing with 'Unfortunates' who the "Capitalist" system has 'thrown' into prison, the capitalis answer to its defaulters.
    Also the massed ranks of the Law profesion in Parliment sees big bucks with all this State Funded workload.
    Parliment is a disgrace feathing it's own nest and in the main living apart from the masses of people who have to conduct their normal lives in the midest of a ever growing criminal population, much imported from abroad.
  8. There are 2 main statistics on crime in this country; recorded crime and from the british crime survey.

    Personally, I prefer the british crime survey since it is less prone to being affected by recording practices (In 2003-ish, recording practices were changed resulting in more crime being recorded), and gives some indication of unreported crimes.

    I'll let the Home Office explain what the BCS is:
    I have shamlessly ripped a graph from the Home Office Statistical Bulletin 06/06:
    Hence, according to the BCS, crime peaked in 1995, but have fallen every year since. And the decline is not due to people reporting less crime.
  9. Yes, I am a law student.

    :oops: It is not something to advertise around these parts.

    Thanks for the link, will check it out!
  10. To be totally honest I do not believe any of the Home Office stats at all. Furthermore, where is the BCS carried out and whom do they contact? The fact that the survey shows the same level of crime with little variation since 2000 to present shows just how much b####cks it is. Even on Police stats I had a break-in and when the local neighbourhood stats provided by OUR local Police came round for the last quarter, I wasn't even listed, despite having SOCO and cops around for 6 hours after the event. Crimes have been reclassified to keep down numbers. There is a backlog on inputting incidents and offenders onto the system countrywide - in some Police areas more than 3 months because of all the paperwork etc. I am near a main road and the old bill are up and down with sirens daily so don't tell me that crime is going down - not in my neck of the woods anyway!
    Rant over :roll:
  11. What then do you believe? 'Newspapers' like The Scum? Or some romantic notion that 'life was better in the past?'. Granted, one must view the government with scepticism, but there must be a limit to that scepticism.

    Yes, there are problems with the methodology. These problems include the fact that the survey does not cover U-16s (there is another survey which covers them), does not cover the homeless and those living in institutions/jails. Some people might not want to take part, ,those that take part will probably be those who are easily contactable by surveyors and they may forget that they have been victimized. But assuming that the methodology is constant, the BCS at least gives an indication of whether rates of victimization are increasing or decreasing. And the indication is that crime rates have been falling for more than a decade.

    I do not understand why very little variation in crime since 2000 = the BCS is bollocks? You cite an incident that have absolutely no bearing on the credulbility of the BCS. As mentioned above, the BCS is seperate from rates of recorded crime and it is for the reasons you have cited that I do not put much stock in the latter.

    I do not know where you live and perhaps you are right - that crime has been increasing in your neighbourhood. But that does not mean that the BCS has no credulbility.

    Btw, changes in recording practices have caused rates of crime to increase.

    (Home Office Statistical Bulletin 06/06)

  12. Very rich coming from "Rambo", the Adjutant General who was happy for his soldiers to do six month tours in pig sty conditions without proper washing facilities let alone laundry, who agreed to phased pay rises, who allowed shoddy and sub standard personal kit to be issued.
  13. Reported Crime staitistics are not accurate. A Crime is only a crime if it is entered into the CRIS system whence it becomes a statistic as soon as the PF1 key is pushed and the intial CRIS number generated.

    I have noticed the Met actively try to avoid entering stuff up and any old LOB is given to the victim as to why their smashed door and forced entry isn't a burglary but a trespass worthy only of the civil court. [Whereas S9[1a/b] Theft Act 1968 would easily cover it, what with their flatscreen £1000 telly just being driven away as a result of the forced entry].

    Another is robbery - a recent case in Croydon existed where a young man was threatened with violence after his mate was punched in the face and handed property over. That satisfied S8 Theft Act 1968, Robbery --- Local police told him, 'No crime as you gave it to him!' [That caused an uproar and a *telephoned* apology from the officer involved].

    These stats are generated by a system that serves only those who input them - reduce the initial entries, reduce the number of reported crime. Tony Bliar and his cronies can then claim they are reducing crime.

    Pretty soon we'll get vigilantes breaking a few legs of the thieving scrotes to clear the Bliar generated mess up and then we'll have a real problem on our hands.