For Fuck's Sake

[devogue]

Woman jailed for three months for £10 jeans theft

A 27-year-old single parent from Strabane has been jailed for three months for stealing a £10 pair of jeans.

Alison Hewitt, of Patterson Park, was convicted after a five-day trial.

Londonderry Crown Court heard Ms Hewitt had taken three pairs of jean to a changing room but returned two. The third was found by police in her baby's pram.

The judge described her actions as "calculated, premeditated and brazen".

He added that Ms Hewitt, who had no previous convictions, been given several opportunities to admit the offence.

A defence lawyer said jailing her would "have an immediate and detrimental impact on her baby daughter".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-12346383

The majority of my business (about 70%) is shop based. I fucking hate shoplifters, but talk about cracking a nut with a sledgehammer. If someone nicked £10 of stock from me I would like the £10 back, their name in the papers, and perhaps a £50 fine or something - a three month jail sentence for a young mother for such a petty crime is a fucking disgrace. Especially when you consider this:

Thieving bank manager spared jail

Published on Tue Feb 01 14:05:39 GMT 2011

A debt-laden bank manager from east London who stole thousands of pounds from a customer has avoided a jail term.

Janet Wylde, 56, from Clementhorpe Road in Dagenham, siphoned £17,700 into her daughter's account while working at Barclays in an attempt to ease their financial woes.

Her daughter was in serious debt and had moved in with Wylde after her home was repossessed, Southwark Crown Court heard.

The money was taken from two bank accounts, both belonging to a Mr Jackson, the court heard.

Judge Michael Howard QC handed down a concurrent sentence of 51 weeks' imprisonment for two charges of fraud, suspended for two years, and Wylde must work unpaid for 200 hours in the first year as part of the conditions.

Passing sentence, the judge said: "You have let your family and yourself down and there is no doubt in my mind that it requires that I pass a sentence for imprisonment."

The court heard Wylde cared for the children of her daughter and those of her business partner, as the pair were starting up a catering company. Given these childcare duties and the unlikelihood that she would reoffend, the judge said that a suspended sentence was more suitable.

http://www.eastbourneherald.co.uk/news/ ... _1_2358829

How can the results of the judicial process in the UK vary so wildly?

[Jesus_of_Nazareth]

case 1 probably had previous longer than yer arm. with the liklihood (certainty?) she would re-offend............I'd have taken the kid off her permanently.

case 2 didn't - and has lost all opportunity to re-offend in exactly the same way (although deposits from customers might be an issue once she gets Googled!).

[klr]

...

How can the results of the judicial process in the UK vary so wildly?

I guess Bob Dylan was right: "Steal a little and they put you in jail, steal a lot and they make you king ..."

[devogue]

case 1 probably had previous longer than yer arm. with the liklihood (certainty?) she would re-offend............I'd have taken the kid off her permanently.

She had no previous convictions. It seems the judge punished her because she refused to plead guilty. The judge should be locked up for being a complete Ratskeppish cunt.

[devogue]

...

How can the results of the judicial process in the UK vary so wildly?

I guess Bob Dylan was right: "Steal a little and they put you in jail, steal a lot and they make you king ..."

Very true.

[Pappa]

convicted after a five-day trial

[Clinton Huxley]

Working class crime needs to be punished more severely than middle-class crime.

[devogue]

convicted after a five-day trial

Well spotted. Fucking mental shit. Take £30 from her dole over three months, put it on her record and tell her to fuck off and never show her face in court again.

But no - a five day trial and three months in jail.

Cuntwits.

edit: spelling

[maiforpeace]

This is the problem with our particular judicial process...it's not restorative, it's punitive. Once you call the cops, it's out of your hands and in the hands of the prosecutors, who think they know what's good for the criminal AND the victim.

Given your example of having wine nicked from your store Dev, wouldn't it be great if you could deal with the crime that way? That would be restorative.

[Clinton Huxley]

Justice must not merely be done, nor even merely be seen to be done but it must be seen to be done very slowly and expensively and with appropriate majesty. Do a trial in half an hour and people will start to wonder why all the lawyers and judges are paid so much....

[Pappa]

Why did it even end up in Crown Court I wonder? Unless she wanted it that way because she thought she'd get off.

[The Curious Squid]

Do you get a lot of shop lifters, Dev?

[devogue]

Given your example of having wine nicked from your store Dev, wouldn't it be great if you could deal with the crime that way? That would be restorative.

That's the thing, Mai. As a shopkeeper I really, really, really, REALLY despise shoplifters. I have moments when I fantasise about the horrible bastards being shot, but I know that's just silly.

Of course, a part of prevention is deterrence - if someone steals £6,000 of wine from me that's going to put my business, livelihood and standard of living in serious jeopardy. In that instance if someone is caught they should expect a custodial sentence because of the seriousness of the crime.

Stealing a £10 bottle of wine is morally wrong, but I'm not going to go out of business and nobody's going to be seriously hurt - it's an extremely minor, if very irritating inconvenience. A person convicted of such an offence should see their name dragged through the mud, they should be fines and given a criminal record - that's enough of a deterence for £10.

No, the real criminals here are the members of the judiciary who brought this stupid fucking case to a crown court, costing tens of thousands of pounds of public money over five days in lawyers' fees, and then locking the defendant up for three months at even more expense (it costs £90,000 per year to detain a prisoner in Northern Ireland - so that's over £20,000 if she completes the full sentence).

Btw, this follows hot on the heels of this fucking monumentally retarded case, another crown court farce with a full jury over a £1.79 child's dummy:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-11784183

And how dare the judge punish her for not pleading guilty. Isn't it the case that a defendant is innocent until proven guilty. If they are guilty, punish them for being guilty, not for fucking protesting their innocence.

[devogue]

Do you get a lot of shop lifters, Dev?

Very few these days, but I do get them.

In October last year my solicitor and the local police put pressure on a man to settle with me before I took it further. He nicked a £40 bottle of wine. He squared me up for the bottle, paid my solictor £50 for a letter, and gave me a tenner on top for my trouble. Everyone was happy and the fucker is barred for life.

[The Curious Squid]

Do you get a lot of shop lifters, Dev?

Very few these days, but I do get them.

In October last year my solicitor and the local police put pressure on a man to settle with me before I took it further. He nicked a £40 bottle of wine. He squared me up for the bottle, paid my solictor £50 for a letter, and gave me a tenner on top for my trouble. Everyone was happy and the fucker is barred for life.

Was the guy a junkie or just a chancer?