Strabane young mother gets 3 months for stealing 10quid pair of jeans

Bottle_of_Smoke

The family of a Strabane woman who was jailed for three months for stealing a £10 pair of jeans has described the sentence as "madness".

Alison Hewitt, from Patterson Park, was convicted on Wednesday after a five-day trial. She is to appeal the jail term.

Londonderry Crown Court heard Ms Hewitt had taken three pairs of jeans to a changing room but returned two. Police found the third in her baby's pram.

The judge said she had been given several opportunities to plead guilty.

The family of the 27-year-old said the situation was "a complete nightmare".

Ms Hewitt's brother, Niall Coulter, said they had been unaware that the single mother had committed the offence.

"It's just so sad that she was carrying this burden and didn't tell us," he said.

"Alison did wrong and she deserves to be punished but not that heavily.

"She has a three-year-old daughter and three months is a long time in a child's life.

"It is going to affect her badly.

"She could have done community service or been given a fine.

"To get three months for a first offence for stealing a £10 pair of jeans is just madness."

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

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-12353258

WTF like. Drug dealers and even the odd rapist gets a suspended sentence.

This girl had no previous convictions, she clearly wasn't stealing for profit as the resale value would be at max about 3quid and in reality zero.

It'l cost god knows what to put her in prison for 3 months. What was the judge thinking?

jimthemental

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

What was the judge thinking?

Maybe she shouldn't have worn the jeans to court.

petes

Why did she not plead guilty?

gbee

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

Calculated, premeditated and brazen

There's your reason right there. We have a potential Bonnie, all she needs is a Clyde to link up with an ...

seanmc1980

she shouldn't have stolen the jeans then if she cant do the time?

MaybeLogic

Condenimed to 3 months for stealing jeans?

That's a bit heavy.

Mr. Presentable

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

What was the judge thinking?

Perhaps he figures this'll act as a deterrent for shoplifters. The value of the goods shouldn't really come into it, nor should the fact she is a mother.

The sentence is harsh, but within the scope of punishment for the crime, so I reckon the thinking is to apply a short, sharp shock and prevent a possible situation down the line where this thief is appearing in Court every week.

The likelihood of the criminal doing the three months is remote in any event.

Yunnie

it will cost up to £20,000 of the taxpayers money to keep her in jail for 3 months, NI,s justice system is a joke

Schism

It says in the article that the judge gave the woman ample opportunity to plead guilty. I'd say the judge just had enough of the situation.

Still a bit overkill on the length of the sentence though.

IvySlayer

She won't do it again will she?

Maybe the judge offered her community service but she kept pleading not guilty so it was updgraded to a jail sentence. And she has some ****ing cheek trying to appeal the setence. Hope it gets rejected and her sentence doubled.

reilig

She had several previous convictions, that was the problem. the last time she appeared in court, the judge told her that if she came to face him again he would jail her - that was a month before this. I'm sure it won't be her last unplanned holiday.

CreepingDeath

Insurgent wrote: »

Why did she not plead guilty?

She thought she could wrangle her way out of a conviction.

Gunsfortoys

She was caught with the pair of jeans and given plenty of opportunity to plead guilty. What an idiot.

Still the sentence is a bit strong though.

ScouseMouse

Yunnie wrote: »

it will cost up to £20,000 of the taxpayers money to keep her in jail for 3 months, NI,s justice system is a joke

Not to mention the cost of a 5 day trial !

Duggy747

3 months for a pair of shìtty £10 jeans?

She should be hung at dawn at the town square in front of a blood-thirsty crowd who'll pelt rotten fruit at her. That'll teach others to steal such valuable denim.

petes

reilig wrote: »

She had several previous convictions, that was the problem. the last time she appeared in court, the judge told her that if she came to face him again he would jail her - that was a month before this. I'm sure it won't be her last unplanned holiday.

Where did you read that?

drunkmonkey

Should have chopped off her hands, the tramp.

cojomo2

Fair play to the judge. I don't think the punishment is too harsh, small punishments send out the wrong signal, and before scum like this make a decesion to rob, they weigh up the risks, and what they think will happen if they get caught.

She obviously though she would get away with it, and if she was caugh, that she would just get a slap on the wrist.

She will think twice next time.

reilig

Insurgent wrote: »

Where did you read that?

I heard it from a relation that lives in Strabane. Apparently her family are trying to drum up support from the local community for her but she has thieved and robbed so much that people think she deserves what she got because she got several warnings and pardons in the recent past.

Family then went to the newspapers to drum up support for her but failed to mention her past.

orourkeda

Theft is theft.

A shte legal system cant be used as an excuse to commit a crime

TerrorFirmer

Duggy747 wrote: »

3 months for a pair of shìtty £10 jeans?

She should be hung at dawn at the town square in front of a blood-thirsty crowd who'll pelt rotten fruit at her. That'll teach others to steal such valuable denim.

ah, had a great laugh at that. best rabble response in ages.

Tazz T

'Lee've her alone.

In fairness, she had ample opportunity to plead guilty. If she didn't want a sentence she should have taken the plea.

The concern should be what happens the child. Even if she hadn't stolen the jeans, I would have thought most mothers would plead guilty to avoid a jail sentence that would separate them from their child.

Bottle_of_Smoke

reilig wrote: »

She had several previous convictions, that was the problem. the last time she appeared in court, the judge told her that if she came to face him again he would jail her - that was a month before this. I'm sure it won't be her last unplanned holiday.

Its been widely reported she has no previous convictions. Surely that would have come up in court and therefore mentioned in the reports. To be honest if she had previous convictions I'd have a lot less sympathy.

Bruthal

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

WTF like. Drug dealers and even the odd rapist gets a suspended sentence.

Well it could be said sentences for drug dealers and rapists are too light rather than this woman`s sentence being too heavy. 3 months seems a bit harsh alright though.

lolie

Duggy747 wrote: »

3 months for a pair of shìtty £10 jeans?

surely whoever sh1t in the jeans should get jail as well;)

Canis Lupus

**** her, it's small time stuff like that often makes peoples lives a nightmare and soft sentences just make the perpetrators (sp?) think they can get away with it. She was caught with her jeans down and as stated the judge gave her plenty of opportunities to plead.

Finally, it's USUALLY a very narrow range of people that shoplift and they generally aren't from a demographic I've a lot of time for. She won't be in for 3 months but let her stew for a while I say.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

orourkeda wrote: »

Theft is theft.

A shte legal system cant be used as an excuse to commit a crime

It's the severity of the snetence and the inconsistance with other sentences handed out to more serious offenders that's the issue here. No one, not even her family, is saying she shouldn't be punished.

Bottle_of_Smoke

orourkeda wrote: »

Theft is theft.

A shte legal system cant be used as an excuse to commit a crime

No one is suggesting that. These kind of crimes should be dealt with through fines or community service.

It is that the punishment does not fit the crime is the problem.

Compare it to these to cases - guy with a kilo of cannabis gets suspended sentence

Man causes 700quid worth of damage and gets probation

Bruthal

Canis Lupus wrote: »

it's USUALLY a very narrow range of people that shoplift and they generally aren't from a demographic I've a lot of time for.

Was it in her genes so:rolleyes:

common sense brigade

she should have pleaded guilty and she would not have been jailed. she clearly annoyed the judge. i feel sorry for her three year old.

MagicSean

Duggy747 wrote: »

3 months for a pair of shìtty £10 jeans?

She should be hung at dawn at the town square in front of a blood-thirsty crowd who'll pelt rotten fruit at her. That'll teach others to steal such valuable denim.

So at what price should stealing become illegal? After how many previous convictions should a person be finally sent to jail?

Canis Lupus

robbie7730 wrote: »

Was it in her genes so:rolleyes:

Ah you missed a pun there.

EDIT: lets face it, it's usually scum that shoplift and thieve. Why should I shed a tear for her?

MagicSean

common sense brigade wrote: »

she should have pleaded guilty and she would not have been jailed. she clearly annoyed the judge. i feel sorry for her three year old.

i feel sorry for the kid anyway with such a **** role model for a parent. What chance does a kid like that have?

Bruthal

Canis Lupus wrote: »

Ah you missed a pun there.

EDIT: lets face it, it's usually scum that shoplift and thieve. Why should I shed a tear for her?

I did`t miss it, but was thinking should i put it as jeans, changed mind then:D

orourkeda

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

No one is suggesting that. These kind of crimes should be dealt with through fines or community service.

It is that the punishment does not fit the crime is the problem.

Compare it to these to cases - guy with a kilo of cannabis gets suspended sentence

Man causes 700quid worth of damage and gets probation

Now I didnt read the whole article but it seems that we do not know the persons full background. Perhaps she's been in trouble with the law before and a sentence like this would not appear that harsh at all in that circumstance.

But the problem is the sentencing.

The notorious example that a lot of people use is the sentencing for manslaughter. I'me very much open to correction here but the sentencing for this crime ranges from a suspended sentence to life. It's at the most serious end of the scale and can carry practically any sentence that takes a judges fancy.

aDeener

Yunnie wrote: »

it will cost up to £20,000 of the taxpayers money to keep her in jail for 3 months, NI,s justice system is a joke

using this 'logic', if you could call it that, would mean that unless the value of the theft outweighed the cost of the trial and imprisonment it would not be worth it? so if she stole €10k worth of goods, this is still a joke? good enough for her

orourkeda

Tazz T wrote: »

'Lee've her alone.

In fairness, she had ample opportunity to plead guilty. If she didn't want a sentence she should have taken the plea.

The concern should be what happens the child. Even if she hadn't stolen the jeans, I would have thought most mothers would plead guilty to avoid a jail sentence that would separate them from their child.

But why plead innocent to acrime you didnt commit.

This would have implications too. A criminal record comes with its own problems.

Bottle_of_Smoke

k_mac wrote: »

So at what price should stealing become illegal? After how many previous convictions should a person be finally sent to jail?

Don't be so melodramatic.

It is obviously already illegal. Though as you are well aware we don't always send people to prison for minor crimes because there are more suitable punishments available.

First time minor offense a fine or community service would have made a lot more sense

Bruthal

aDeener wrote: »

using this 'logic', if you could call it that, would mean that unless the value of the theft outweighed the cost of the trial and imprisonment it would not be worth it? so if she stole €10k worth of goods, this is still a joke? good enough for her

Thats a good point, probably save more tax payers money in future as well if it deters her from doing it again.

jimmycrackcorm

The judge said she had been given several opportunities to plead guilty.

That's why she got the sentence. She obviously had no regret.

newmug

I cant understand all the bleeding hearts? How is 3 months harsh? She broke the law and stole something. Yes STOLE. She is a THIEF. She should have gotten a year at least. Its thieves like her we can all do without in society:mad:

Bruthal

orourkeda wrote: »

But why plead innocent to a crime you didnt commit.

I think most would plead innocent to crimes they didnt commit:D

Remmy

Meh it's theft she got a reduced sentence.

Canis Lupus

robbie7730 wrote: »

I think most would plead innocent to crimes they didnt commit:D

Like the A Team.

Einhard

Canis Lupus wrote: »

**** her, it's small time stuff like that often makes peoples lives a nightmare

Ah yes, I live in fear every waking moment because of 27 year old mothers robbing jeans.

Sometimes reading AH on these cases is reminiscent of flicking through the court reports of the 18th century, such is the level of outrage, vindictiveness, and hysterical hyperbole. The woman stole a pair of jeans. According to the reports it was a first time offence. Community service or a fine would have sufficed.

Bruthal

Einhard wrote: »

Ah yes, I live in fear every waking moment because of 27 year old mothers robbing jeans.

Sometimes reading AH on these cases is reminiscent of flicking through the court reports of the 18th century, such is the level of outrage, vindictiveness, and hysterical hyperbole. The woman stole a pair of jeans. According to the reports it was a first time offence. Community service or a fine would have sufficed.

All serious criminals start off with a first time offence.

prinz

Einhard wrote: »

Community service or a fine would have sufficed.

They would have had she plead guilty. These things are usually offered first before the trial if the person will plead guilty and save the taxpayers the cost of a trial. She refused. Otherwise all you'd have is every scummer up for every little offence pleading not guilty to everything and wasting court time and taxpayer money to walk away and have a laugh at the system at the end. You plead guilty for a reduced sentence. No doubt the same people will be delighted when thousands of euros/pounds are spent on week long trials for every case of shoplifting in he country.

Bruthal

Canis Lupus wrote: »

Like the A Team.

if you can find them:)

Duggy747

k_mac wrote: »

So at what price should stealing become illegal? After how many previous convictions should a person be finally sent to jail?

My post you quoted was a joke, no need to go over the top.

Einhard

robbie7730 wrote: »

All serious criminals start off with a first time offence.

People should be punished for crimes the commit, not for potential crimes they may commit in years to come.

prinz wrote: »

They would have had she plead guilty. These things are usually offered first before the trial if the person will plead guilty and save the taxpayers the cost of a trial. She refused. Otherwise all you'd have is every scummer up for every little offence pleading not guilty to everything and wasting court time and taxpayer money to walk away and have a laugh at the system at the end. You plead guilty for a reduced sentence.

Yeah, I see the logic in that, but I still think 3 months is far too harsh for a first offence. Also, it wasn't so much the sentence I was objecting to, but predictable response from the hang em flog em brigade.

speedboatchase

Let me guess... because the jeans were £10, that makes it alright then, does it? Good grief