Man who ran bike over Pc jailed

#2
"The judge sentenced Hewitt to an indeterminate jail sentence for public protection and gave him a six-year driving ban"

he got an "indeterminate" jail sentence? what on earth does that mean?
 
#3
Poppy said:
"The judge sentenced Hewitt to an indeterminate jail sentence for public protection and gave him a six-year driving ban"

he got an "indeterminate" jail sentence? what on earth does that mean?
Under the provisions of the Criminal Justice Act 2003, implemented last year, serious offenders, convicted of crimes of sex and violence, can be given an indeterminate jail term for "public protection". This means they can be kept in jail until it is thought they are safe to release. This is then a decision for the Parole Board.
 
#4
If a cop ran over a woman outside a pub, they would just get a slap on the wrist. This guy gets a potential REAL-LIFE prison sentence, when a criminal like a baby rapist is likely to get a couple of months, at most, if they are caught at all.

Today, like a lot of ordinary law abiding citizens I view the police as one step below criminals.

Not their fault admittedly, but when you go around arresting people who call your horse gay and turn your backs on people wanting to "kill all infidels" you can expect public opinion to plummit. then to disappear completely when the public get a speeding fine for doing 43 in a 40 zone and getting nothing but an offer of "counselling" when a crime is committed against them.
 
#5
Cuchulainn said:
If a cop ran over a woman outside a pub, they would just get a slap on the wrist. This guy gets a potential REAL-LIFE prison sentence, when a criminal like a baby rapist is likely to get a couple of months, at most, if they are caught at all.

Today, like a lot of ordinary law abiding citizens I view the police as one step below criminals.

Not their fault admittedly, but when you go around arresting people who call your horse gay and turn your backs on people wanting to "kill all infidels" you can expect public opinion to plummit. then to disappear completely when the public get a speeding fine for doing 43 in a 40 zone and getting nothing but an offer of "counselling" when a crime is committed against them.
And that justifies the injuries this constable received???..
 
#6
Mad_Moriarty said:
Cuchulainn said:
If a cop ran over a woman outside a pub, they would just get a slap on the wrist. This guy gets a potential REAL-LIFE prison sentence, when a criminal like a baby rapist is likely to get a couple of months, at most, if they are caught at all.

Today, like a lot of ordinary law abiding citizens I view the police as one step below criminals.

Not their fault admittedly, but when you go around arresting people who call your horse gay and turn your backs on people wanting to "kill all infidels" you can expect public opinion to plummit. then to disappear completely when the public get a speeding fine for doing 43 in a 40 zone and getting nothing but an offer of "counselling" when a crime is committed against them.
And that justifies the terrible injuries this constable received???..
You are missing the point, nowhere did i state that the injuries where justified.

The point is the punishment does not fit the crime. If you commit murder you do about 3-5 years inside, if you rape a baby you do a few months. If, on the other hand you run over a cop, you could potentially spend THE REST OF YOUR LIFE in prison.

Plus, if you happen to be a cop yourself, commit any driving offence and get off.

You dont see anything wrong with the above?
 
#7
Cuchulainn said:
Mad_Moriarty said:
Cuchulainn said:
If a cop ran over a woman outside a pub, they would just get a slap on the wrist. This guy gets a potential REAL-LIFE prison sentence, when a criminal like a baby rapist is likely to get a couple of months, at most, if they are caught at all.

Today, like a lot of ordinary law abiding citizens I view the police as one step below criminals.

Not their fault admittedly, but when you go around arresting people who call your horse gay and turn your backs on people wanting to "kill all infidels" you can expect public opinion to plummit. then to disappear completely when the public get a speeding fine for doing 43 in a 40 zone and getting nothing but an offer of "counselling" when a crime is committed against them.
And that justifies the terrible injuries this constable received???..
You are missing the point, nowhere did i state that the injuries where justified.

The point is the punishment does not fit the crime. If you commit murder you do about 3-5 years inside, if you rape a baby you do a few months. If, on the other hand you run over a cop, you could potentially spend THE REST OF YOUR LIFE in prison.

Plus, if you happen to be a cop yourself, commit any driving offence and get off.

You dont see anything wrong with the above?
Did you actually read his previous?

85 previous offences, including deliberately riding a bicycle at a police officer.
 
#8
85 previous offences, including deliberately riding a bicycle at a police officer.
Actually, that little factoid kind of reinforces Cuchulainn's point: only the Police would leap on you for 'riding a pushbike' at them - imagine their response if you or I said that we wanted someone charged because they'd evilly and with intent, viciously cycled into us!!
 
#9
Hound, while I agree that the punishment rarely fits the crime - if it did, all terrs, nonces etc would already be taking the dirt nap - I don't see why you're complaining about the sentance this scumbag recieved. One less piece of Blair on the street. Result.
 
#10
Nibbler said:
85 previous offences, including deliberately riding a bicycle at a police officer.
Actually, that little factoid kind of reinforces Cuchulainn's point: only the Police would leap on you for 'riding a pushbike' at them - imagine their response if you or I said that we wanted someone charged because they'd evilly and with intent, viciously cycled into us!!
I think the CCTV kind of backed the conviction up!!!
 
#11
Cuchulainn said:
If a cop ran over a woman outside a pub, they would just get a slap on the wrist. This guy gets a potential REAL-LIFE prison sentence, when a criminal like a baby rapist is likely to get a couple of months, at most, if they are caught at all.

Today, like a lot of ordinary law abiding citizens I view the police as one step below criminals.

Not their fault admittedly, but when you go around arresting people who call your horse gay and turn your backs on people wanting to "kill all infidels" you can expect public opinion to plummit. then to disappear completely when the public get a speeding fine for doing 43 in a 40 zone and getting nothing but an offer of "counselling" when a crime is committed against them.
First you seem to have no idea of the justice system in this country.

The police gather the evidence, arrest and charge if the prosecutors say so. They do not try, convict or sentence.

So your little tirade only shows your ignorance. As for speeding, you know the law, break it and you pay. We all speed, some do it at inappropriate time or locations.

After the verdict, the jury was told Hewitt had a record of 85 previous offences, including deliberately riding a bicycle at a police officer.
It would seem that he has a history of this that is why he got the sentence he did.
 
#12
Mad_Moriarty said:
Under the provisions of the Criminal Justice Act 2003, implemented last year, serious offenders, convicted of crimes of sex and violence, can be given an indeterminate jail term for "public protection". This means they can be kept in jail until it is thought they are safe to release. This is then a decision for the Parole Board.
What is the difference between this and a 'life' sentence? Anybody know? I always thought life meant jail till the parole board lets you out, after your minimum term, then supervision till you die. Sounds identical to the indeterminate sentence described.
 
#13
Ancient_Mariner said:
Mad_Moriarty said:
Under the provisions of the Criminal Justice Act 2003, implemented last year, serious offenders, convicted of crimes of sex and violence, can be given an indeterminate jail term for "public protection". This means they can be kept in jail until it is thought they are safe to release. This is then a decision for the Parole Board.
What is the difference between this and a 'life' sentence? Anybody know? I always thought life meant jail till the parole board lets you out, after your minimum term, then supervision till you die. Sounds identical to the indeterminate sentence described.
Whether the sentence is tougher than before, therefore, depends on whether the Parole Board is more likely to keep people in jail than used to be the case. This is all uncharted territory because the new regime only took effect in April 2005 so anyone sentenced to a "public protection" term will not yet have come up for parole.
 
#14
Mad_Moriarty said:
Cuchulainn said:
Mad_Moriarty said:
Cuchulainn said:
If a cop ran over a woman outside a pub, they would just get a slap on the wrist. This guy gets a potential REAL-LIFE prison sentence, when a criminal like a baby rapist is likely to get a couple of months, at most, if they are caught at all.

Today, like a lot of ordinary law abiding citizens I view the police as one step below criminals.

Not their fault admittedly, but when you go around arresting people who call your horse gay and turn your backs on people wanting to "kill all infidels" you can expect public opinion to plummit. then to disappear completely when the public get a speeding fine for doing 43 in a 40 zone and getting nothing but an offer of "counselling" when a crime is committed against them.
And that justifies the terrible injuries this constable received???..
You are missing the point, nowhere did i state that the injuries where justified.

The point is the punishment does not fit the crime. If you commit murder you do about 3-5 years inside, if you rape a baby you do a few months. If, on the other hand you run over a cop, you could potentially spend THE REST OF YOUR LIFE in prison.

Plus, if you happen to be a cop yourself, commit any driving offence and get off.

You dont see anything wrong with the above?
Did you actually read his previous?

85 previous offences, including deliberately riding a bicycle at a police officer.
You just proved my point for me, 85 previous offences, why wasnt he locked up already? To the average everyday person, there are 3 types of people -
1. PC Plod
2. Criminal Chav
3.Ordinary Joe

All most people see is that PC Plod and Criminal Chav either never get punishment for committing crimes or when they do get punishment its too late. Ordinary Joe on the other hand, will go to work and come home to find he has been banned for driving for doing a couple of miles an hour over the limit and when he gets in his house to find it being burgled he will get arrested if he tackles the burglar and sued if the burglar injuries himslef whilst beating the crap out off Joe.

Whilst I dont condone what happened to the officer (who could?) I doubt she will find much sympathy from the civpop, mainly because there is something seriously wrong with our constabulary and judiciary these days.
 
#15
I think the CCTV kind of backed the conviction up!!!
Moriarty, don't get me wrong - always delighted to see a scrote banged up. However, I do actually have a suspicion that Cuch's view is on the nail. The public perception is that the police are now just another bliarite spin factory, who have lost sight of their role as protectors of the public, and - for example - are far more interested in revenue from speed cameras than catching criminals.

I well remember being slightly surprised in a bored moment one afternoon, when I sat one of their online 'so you want to join the police' tests. It painted a scenario where you were helping to chase some armed robbers, and had a series of multiple choice options for you to select from. At the point at which the robbers were hiding in a building, I selected the 'go in and find 'em' option... I was slightly surprised to get, in effect, a 'ooh, no - we don't want you doing that - your safety is the paramount factor, before all others'... WTF? Isn't the public's safety the paramount factor??

Individuals are brave and competent, but as an institution, they have undoubtedly lost the confidence of a large proportion of the 'ordinary decent public' Just look at that clown in charge of the Met.
 
#16
Whilst I condone what happened to the officer (who could?) I doubt she will find much sympathy from the civpop, mainly because there is something seriously wrong with our constabulary and judiciary these days.
PC tries to restrain a member of the public involved in a fight, he pulls her to the pavement and an idiot rides a bike over her. So according to you that means there is something seriously wrong with our constabulary and judiciary these days????
 
#17
Cuchulainn said:
Mad_Moriarty said:
Cuchulainn said:
Mad_Moriarty said:
Cuchulainn said:
If a cop ran over a woman outside a pub, they would just get a slap on the wrist. This guy gets a potential REAL-LIFE prison sentence, when a criminal like a baby rapist is likely to get a couple of months, at most, if they are caught at all.

Today, like a lot of ordinary law abiding citizens I view the police as one step below criminals.

Not their fault admittedly, but when you go around arresting people who call your horse gay and turn your backs on people wanting to "kill all infidels" you can expect public opinion to plummit. then to disappear completely when the public get a speeding fine for doing 43 in a 40 zone and getting nothing but an offer of "counselling" when a crime is committed against them.
And that justifies the terrible injuries this constable received???..
You are missing the point, nowhere did i state that the injuries where justified.

The point is the punishment does not fit the crime. If you commit murder you do about 3-5 years inside, if you rape a baby you do a few months. If, on the other hand you run over a cop, you could potentially spend THE REST OF YOUR LIFE in prison.

Plus, if you happen to be a cop yourself, commit any driving offence and get off.

You dont see anything wrong with the above?
Did you actually read his previous?

85 previous offences, including deliberately riding a bicycle at a police officer.
You just proved my point for me, 85 previous offences, why wasnt he locked up already? To the average everyday person, there are 3 types of people -
1. PC Plod
2. Criminal Chav
3.Ordinary Joe

All most people see is that PC Plod and Criminal Chav either never get punishment for committing crimes or when they do get punishment its too late. Ordinary Joe on the other hand, will go to work and come home to find he has been banned for driving for doing a couple of miles an hour over the limit and when he gets in his house to find it being burgled he will get arrested if he tackles the burglar and sued if the burglar injuries himslef whilst beating the crap out off Joe.

Whilst I condone what happened to the officer (who could?) I doubt she will find much sympathy from the civpop, mainly because there is something seriously wrong with our constabulary and judiciary these days.
my bold

Slip of the key board?

Read the story, he is 36 so with 85 convictions probably has done time.

So you lost your licence because you broke the law. That nothing to do with the police it’s your inability to follow the rules. Most people take note the first time they get a photo through the post.
 
#19
Nibbler said:
I well remember being slightly surprised in a bored moment one afternoon, when I sat one of their online 'so you want to join the police' tests. It painted a scenario where you were helping to chase some armed robbers, and had a series of multiple choice options for you to select from. At the point at which the robbers were hiding in a building, I selected the 'go in and find 'em' option... I was slightly surprised to get, in effect, a 'ooh, no - we don't want you doing that - your safety is the paramount factor, before all others'... WTF? Isn't the public's safety the paramount factor??

Individuals are brave and competent, but as an institution, they have undoubtedly lost the confidence of a large proportion of the 'ordinary decent public' Just look at that clown in charge of the Met.
That has more to do with the HSE and prosecutions of commanders if police officers are injured at work. The manager is responsible. A number of cases have occurred when the CC has been taken to courts by the HSE for H&S issues. PC follows suspect across a roof and falls through, police told not to work at heights.
 
#20
offog said:
Cuchulainn said:
Mad_Moriarty said:
Cuchulainn said:
Mad_Moriarty said:
Cuchulainn said:
If a cop ran over a woman outside a pub, they would just get a slap on the wrist. This guy gets a potential REAL-LIFE prison sentence, when a criminal like a baby rapist is likely to get a couple of months, at most, if they are caught at all.

Today, like a lot of ordinary law abiding citizens I view the police as one step below criminals.

Not their fault admittedly, but when you go around arresting people who call your horse gay and turn your backs on people wanting to "kill all infidels" you can expect public opinion to plummit. then to disappear completely when the public get a speeding fine for doing 43 in a 40 zone and getting nothing but an offer of "counselling" when a crime is committed against them.
And that justifies the terrible injuries this constable received???..
You are missing the point, nowhere did i state that the injuries where justified.

The point is the punishment does not fit the crime. If you commit murder you do about 3-5 years inside, if you rape a baby you do a few months. If, on the other hand you run over a cop, you could potentially spend THE REST OF YOUR LIFE in prison.

Plus, if you happen to be a cop yourself, commit any driving offence and get off.

You dont see anything wrong with the above?
Did you actually read his previous?

85 previous offences, including deliberately riding a bicycle at a police officer.
You just proved my point for me, 85 previous offences, why wasnt he locked up already? To the average everyday person, there are 3 types of people -
1. PC Plod
2. Criminal Chav
3.Ordinary Joe

All most people see is that PC Plod and Criminal Chav either never get punishment for committing crimes or when they do get punishment its too late. Ordinary Joe on the other hand, will go to work and come home to find he has been banned for driving for doing a couple of miles an hour over the limit and when he gets in his house to find it being burgled he will get arrested if he tackles the burglar and sued if the burglar injuries himslef whilst beating the crap out off Joe.

Whilst I condone what happened to the officer (who could?) I doubt she will find much sympathy from the civpop, mainly because there is something seriously wrong with our constabulary and judiciary these days.
my bold

Slip of the key board?

Read the story, he is 36 so with 85 convictions probably has done time.

So you lost your licence because you broke the law. That nothing to do with the police it’s your inability to follow the rules. Most people take note the first time they get a photo through the post.
Yup, a misprint. Anyway, go back and have a read at what I wrote, I never stated I lost my licence, nor actually state anything about myself. Rather I pointed out what is a majority view the public now have.

That if you commit a crime and are a habitual criminal you wont get properly punished, unless its against a cop. If you commit a crime and you are a cop, you wont get punished. if you commit a crime and you are a normally law abiding citizen you will get punished. If you commit a crime, as a normally law abiding citizen against either a cop or a criminal, your punishment will be out of all proportion to the crime.
 

Latest Threads

Top