Tuesday, 5 May 2009

Just What Purpose Does This Sentence Serve?


What's the collective noun for a bunch of judges?
A cluster-fuck? A fuck-wittery? A corruption?


Some judge has banged up a young mother for 9 months for leaving her baby alone and uncared for for 6 hours while she went shopping with her own mother. The baby has been taken into care and remains with foster parents.

Obviously the stupid woman has not had much of an example set her by her own mother, and is an inadequate parent. So take the child into care, but who on earth benefits from locking this daft cow up for nine minute let alone nine months. She's lost her child, been ridiculed and dragged through the courts, isn't that kind of sufficient?
It's a fucking sight longer than Lord Ahmed got for killing a man, remember?

It's not going to help her long term, and it's going to use up a prison place which could be more usefully occupied by a genuine criminal. And it'll cost taxpayers to keep her there, and make it more difficult for her to get work when she gets out.

I can see no point in it, and I'm so far from soft liberal PC do-gooding fucking hand-wringers as it is possible to get without actually being Genghis Khan's nastier brother.

The Penguin

14 comments:

subrosa said...

It serves no purpose at all. A couple of years ago a group of adults left their children unattended for several evenings while they wined and dined. No charges were brought against them.

Double standards indeed.

Spartan said...

Ah... but if the child had disappeared everything would've been fine ... just ask the McCanns.

Bill d'Sarse said...

The judge second from the left - isn't he the actor who played 'Razors' in the film, 'Long Good Friday'?

http://www.mclean-williams.com/images/clients/Moriarty%20PH.jpg

The Penguin said...

Can't be, Razors was gi-normous, and a lot smarter than most judges.

North Northwester said...

Got to disagree with you lovely people on this one.

Leaving a child under 13 alone is a crime in this country. They keep doing it; for hours, days, and sometimes weeks. I think it may have been done to intimidate others from being so negligent.
And words cannot EXPRESS how I feel about the McCanns, and I refuse to use pictures.

They're kids; look after them, or lose them and be hurt.
And that should go for doleys and middle-class victim-scallies alike. That it doesn't is another example of the benefit of living under a Labour government running the legal system. The judge said this:
'You left your daughter alone for up to five or six hours without anyone able to give her the attention that she needed.
You left her so that she was without food or water, in a soiled nappy in an unsafe and unprotected environment.
That is an appalling thing to do with a child of this age, even wicked.'

CryBaby said...

Actually, that place she's taken in prison belongs to Baroness Pola Uddin, the benefit-mugging thief!

The main issue here is that running the country is like running a business and none of these cretins have had any experience in using basic common sense. The double-standards are shameful.

This dumbass woman should be told she has to go find a job and failing that, make her fucking clean the streets!

Asswipes havent got a clue because they get paid by us, squander our money and claim expenses for porn, bath plugs and saunas for their skin conditions.

Get them all out! Call a fucking election!

subrosa said...

North Westener, I believe child neglect is also a crime in Portugal is it not.

Dark Lochnagar said...

Not with you completely on this one Ranter. I don't think babies should be left alone certainly not for 6 hours. There must be however a better punishment than Jail. I agree with yoiu that most Lawers are self important pricks of the first degree and the Judges are merely super pricks.

RayD said...

She has failed to take care of the government's baby so the government has taken its baby back and punished her. What's the problem?

The Penguin said...

I think there's a degree of misunderstanding here. I do not agree with neglecting children, and such stupid behaviour should indeed be punished, and has been. She's lost the child.

But locking her up for 9 months serves no useful purpose. The deterrent effect is nil, these inadequates don't register such things. If you wanted a deterrent, cut her head off, that might register.

Anonymous said...

North Northwester said...

Got to disagree with you lovely people on this one.

Leaving a child under 13 alone is a crime in this country.

Gotta agree. Is the same true in Portugal?

North Northwester said...

Hi RP and Subrosa.

RP, I got it - you think she's done wrong, no excuses. That's where we're on the same hymn book.

I agree with the original post;'It's not going to help her long term,' - in this case it's not going to 'help her' at all.

Prison is a punishment - a process that deliberately hurts criminals in order variously: to make the rest of us feel that justice has been served; to deter others from similar crimes; to prevent repeat offences for a while[ obviously only half of that applies her as they've taken the kid away] and only sometimes to allow reform of the criminal's character [not at all sure this applies here as she's a bit simple, I think.]

There may be other mothers out there thinking they'll go to the pub or shopping for the day, or off to Spain for a fortnight.

Hopefully, this might scare some of them off. Can't be sure - nothing and nobody's perfect in this life, but it's worth a try.

Oh, and we should build some more prisons. May I suggest we use the Probation Service's budget (less 30%) to do it with?

Subrosa, I don't know if leaving a kid is illegal in Portugal - it surely should be, and as I've not made it clear, I really, really disapprove of the McCanns' neglect of their child. They are utterly crap - even if you ignore RP's post about it here: -

http://therantingkingpenguin.blogspot.com/2009/05/banned-video-about-maddie.html


I'd want the book throwing at them, myself - with jail sentences for them to spend reading the book. Quite how their PR has made victims of them, I don't know, but then Obama's the President and Tony Blair got to Number Ten, so nothing's impossible, I suppose.

Oh, and on the subject of names, mine is actually North Northwester.
At least, it is when I’m discussing socio-political events here in the UK and on Earth in general.

When I’m discussing matters in outer space I go by a slightly different version of my name: North N Wester.

:-)

RayD said...

Sarcasm aside I'm with you on this one, pingwing. Taking the baby away (and the child benefit) is punishment enough.

What I find remarkable is that she's 28, I'd expected her to be much younger. You have to suspect an element of nutter in someone who can't reasonably claim to be too young to have known better.

The mother's age aside, the article leaves out more than it mentions. Do mother and daughter live together? Do either have a partner? (A husband is too much to ask for.) Is the accommodation state subsidised? Are benefit cheques involved? She obviously doesn't care much for the baby, is it by any chance dark complexioned?

If her mother knew her daughter was leaving the baby alone she is clearly an accessory and should have been punished as well. They should have both been sent on a "how not to kill your baby" course. That'd learn 'em.

Earthlet Nigel said...

As stated more has been left out than we are ever likely to know.

I don't agree that she should have left her child alone, if shopping why couldn't the child have been taken along.

What causes most concern here is the apparent disproportion of the sentence handed down.

McCanns no case heard
Ahmed arse wipe 16 days for murder
Tracey Connolly innocent despite living in the house where rape and murder were taking place.

Remember the latch-key kids, I appreciate most were older than this baby, but the faults lie with a succession of governments micromanaging everything and the complete abrogation of commonsense.

The judge will have considered the evidence, the defence, no doubt disinterested, and paying lip service to the system is unlikely to have been the most vigorous.

What is unreported says in someways more than what was said. Would full reporting have made the case for the prosecution look weak. Quite likely, and no doubt a prepared statement was handed to the unquestioning copywriters that pass for journalists today.

There is, to iterate, much that is wrong, seriously wrong with this, from both sides of the fence.
It also smacks of the SS being bolstered for their past failings post Peter Connolly by the full weight of the law.