Jobs I don't want - alt.fan.pratchett

The old Google Groups will be going away soon, but your browser is incompatible with the new version.
alt.fan.pratchett
Message from discussion Jobs I don't want
Path: pr3ni61160pbb.0!nntp.google.com!news1.google.com!goblin3!goblin.stu.neva.ru!de-l.enfer-du-nord.net!feeder2.enfer-du-nord.net!border1.nntp.ams2.giganews.com!border3.nntp.ams.giganews.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!border1.nntp.ams.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local2.nntp.ams.giganews.com!nntp.brightview.co.uk!news.brightview.co.uk.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 00:35:23 -0500
Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 06:35:31 +0100
From: Nigel Stapley <u...@judgemental.plus.com>
Reply-To: u...@judgemental.plus.com
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Windows/20100228)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: alt.fan.pratchett
Subject: Re: [I]Jobs I don't want
References: <148458890359822769.623961alec-spamspam.co.uk@news.individual.net> <jq04tj$mfv$1@mud.stack.nl> <770334317359922339.715138alec-spamspam.co.uk@news.individual.net> <EcmdncCEoK2Wel7SnZ2dnUVZ7oWdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <EcmdncCEoK2Wel7SnZ2dnUVZ7oWdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
Message-ID: <AOudnbJoAs6G_VnSnZ2dnUVZ8tidnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
Lines: 112
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Nigel Stapley wrote:
> Alec Cawley wrote:
>> Lesley Weston <brightly_coloured_b...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On 05-27-12 7:51 AM, Alec Cawley wrote:
>>>> Lesley Weston<brightly_coloured_b...@yahoo.co.uk>  wrote:
>>>>> On 05-26-12 10:48 AM, Larry Moore wrote:
>>>>>> On 2012-05-26, Nigel Stapley<u...@judgemental.plus.com>   wrote:
>>>>>>> GaryN wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Maybe we should start using a different system.  Anyone wishing to
>>>>>>>> legislate about the job can damn well go and train to do it (the 
>>>>>>>> job)
>>>>>>>> for 6 months, then do it for 3 months.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This chimes with my view that anyone wishing to be a judge (at 
>>>>>>> whatever
>>>>>>> level) should be obliged, before making their final application (or
>>>>>>> accepting the appointment), to spend a minimum of three months in 
>>>>>>> prison
>>>>>>> (Category C or even B, not 'open') being treated *exactly* as a
>>>>>>> convicted inmate would be treated. Then perhaps we wouldn't see 
>>>>>>> so many
>>>>>>> of the old thugs throwing people needlessly into prison to "make an
>>>>>>> example", or "send a message", or simply because the bastards *can*.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This contrast with those who require judges to read every victim 
>>>>>> impact
>>>>>> statement before sentencing; that they have no prior personal or
>>>>>> family experience as an accused before the bar.
>>>>>>
>>>>> I don't see the point of victim impact statements. The newly-convicted
>>>>> person did what they did whatever the result of their actions might 
>>>>> have
>>>>> been; the sentence should be something appropriate to that, not 
>>>>> increased
>>>>> because the victim's second cousin misses him. I don't like the way 
>>>>> many
>>>>> trials are conducted either, when the prosecution are presenting their
>>>>> case: While there's no doubt that this crime is horrible and that the
>>>>> person who did it must be stopped from doing it again, that has 
>>>>> nothing
>>>>> to do with whether or not the accused is that person.
>>>>>
>>>> The point is to distinguish between a burglary on a wealthy 
>>>> businessman,
>>>> for whom the burglary is an irritation requiring  lengthy paperwork 
>>>> with
>>>> the insurance company, and an elderly widow living on her own who is so
>>>> traumatised that she has to move out of her house. Or between 
>>>> knocking down
>>>> a scarred bruiser who regularly gets into fights and inflicting the 
>>>> same
>>>> blow on a timid theology student who has never intentionally hurt a 
>>>> fly.
>>>> Second cousins don't come into it. The crime, in the sense of 
>>>> monetary of
>>>> physical damage done, may be the same, but the damage to the victim 
>>>> wildly
>>>> different. Society, and therefore the law, wants crimes against the
>>>> vulnerable to be treated with more severity than the same crimes 
>>>> against
>>>> the strong.
>>> Yes, of course. That isn't the same thing as victim impact statements.
>>> Those happen when the friends and relations of the murdered person read
>>> out statements, or if they're really good make apparently spontaneous
>>> speeches, about how much they miss the murdered person, how their income
>>> has fallen because of the death and so forth. It's especially effective
>>> when it's a child doing it, unless the child is clearly reading a
>>> statement prepared for her by somebody else and not even trying to put
>>> any kind of expression into it, as happened last week in such a case 
>>> in BC.
>>>
>>>     This all happens after the accused has been convicted, and is 
>>> supposed
>>> to help the judge decide on an appropriate sentence. You quite often see
>>> interviews afterwards with the people who made the statements, who are
>>> saying things like "That's not nearly long enough. I want him to 
>>> *suffer*."
>>>
>>
>> That is not a victim impact statement as I understand it, so we may be
>> talking at cross purposes. The one I mean is definitely a written 
>> document,
>> written in a semi-legal form with assistance, similar to a witness
>> statement before trial prepared with the help of a police officer. There
>> are definitely not emotional statements in court. It is one of a 
>> bundle of
>> papers, along with social workers reports, psychiatrists reports etc, 
>> given
>> to the judge in considering sentence. So I think we are not talking 
>> about e
>> same thing.
> 
> OK, I concede that point if you're referring to a written document which 
> is, in essence, for the judge's eyes only, and it being one of a number 
> of factors. I was thinking more of the US version which, as I said 
> before, allows attorney's to go further over the top than a WWI squaddie.
> 
> 
> 

Aaargh!!!! Apostrophe catastrophe!!! It must be old age creeping up...

-- 
Regards

Nigel Stapley

www.thejudge.me.uk

<reply-to will bounce>
Create a group - Google Groups - Google Home - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy
Account Options
