Do women get more lenient sentences?

Pat Mustard

Mod:

Heisman, please do not post off topic.

Also, you responded to a previous mod warning on another thread. Please don't do that.

NachoBusiness

Yet another case of a women having sex with a 15 year old boy and not having to serve time. Yet on the very same day a homeless guy, who has the mental maturity of a teenager (as a result of having a stroke in his teens), was jailed for over two years for having sex with a 15 year old girl.

iptba

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2997548/Women-tortured-man-burning-hair-tongs-cigarette-lighter-genitals-like-scene-Reservoir-Dogs-dated-three-people-once.html

Abduction, imprisonment, torture? No problem Off you go now.

The victim talks about the effects of the crime on him and that he thinks the sentence was too soft:

‘Did I have to die for them to go to prison?’
http://www.thescarboroughnews.co.uk/news/crime/did-i-have-to-die-for-them-to-go-to-prison-1-7164949

NachoBusiness

UK woman gives 14 year old boy alcohol, repeatedly has sex with him, but you guessed it, she walks..

Love-starved Corporal's wife who seduced soldier's son, 14, after meeting him on a school bus is spared jail

A Corporal's wife who was 'starved of affection' was spared jail yesterday after having sex with the 14-year-old son of a soldier.

Caroline Salisbury, 27, lured the boy into her bed after meeting him on a school bus.

The mother-of-two, who had been 'looking for love', pleaded guilty to four charges of sexual activity with a child – after earlier telling a neighbour she had been raped by him.

Salisbury, who was 25 at the time, began having sex sessions in her living room with the boy a week after his 14th birthday in 2013, the Service Civilian Court was told.

They met when she became a bus monitor escorting children of soldiers based in a British garrison in Germany to school.

Colonel Nigel Jones, prosecuting, told the court: 'She invited him to her house and the relationship developed from just being friends into what became a sexual relationship.'

She would send him Facebook messages when her husband, David, a corporal in the Royal Engineers, was out, so he could visit her married quarters for drink and sex.

In one message she told the boy: 'Come at four. He won't be in. I cannot wait for you to f*** me again.'

Defence barrister Peter Glenser told the court that Salisbury was 'starved of affection' by her husband who has since left the Army and is working in Saudi Arabia.

'It was for this reason she sought the company of people younger than herself,' he said.

'That is utterly criminal. The police warned you off and you carried on. Young boys have to be kept safe and not be groomed and taken back to your house when your husband was away.

'You were looking for love. You are a damaged woman. I am going to take an exceptional course – you have come within a hair's breadth of going to prison for a long time.

'I pass this suspended sentence with a heavy heart. You need to stay away from young boys.'

Read full article here.

Was in somewhat of a position of of authority also and so that makes it even worse.

iptba

NachoBusiness wrote: »

Defence barrister Peter Glenser told the court that Salisbury was 'starved of affection' by her husband who has since left the Army and is working in Saudi Arabia.

Not something you tend to hear when men are defendants.

The mother-of-two, who had been 'looking for love', pleaded guilty to four charges of sexual activity with a child – after earlier telling a neighbour she had been raped by him.

Charming

ThunbergsAreGo

iptba wrote: »

Not something you tend to hear when men are defendants.


Charming

This calls for a face book petition.....

An absolute disgrace, even reporting her as sex starved and not convicted sex offender is horrendous.

Letting her out is very irresponsible

Cookie_Monster

The whole thing is pretty disgusting but this in particular:

It was for this reason she sought the company of people younger than herself,' he said.

take the biscuit. What exactly was stopping her from getting it on with another adult and specifically seemingly 'forcing' her to go for kids?

It's pretty obscene that she got away without a custodial sentence, can only hope it gets reviewed.

Mr.H

As long as the word Feminism exists, these stories will continue to happen

Instead of talking mens rights or womens rights we should all be talking human rights. Feminists say that they want equality but its obvious they are not fighting for that.

Really sickening to hear this stuff.

A friend of my other half is big into feminism. Its like she thinks its an idea rather than understanding its a movement. Ironic thing is I doubt this girl has ever suffered anything other than privilege............

tritium

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/woman-got-overexcited-after-confirmation-party-and-assaulted-a-garda-court-told-31155652.html

Attacks a guard, steals a quantity of groceries in a separate incident.

"Your honour my client had drink taken"

Oh, grand so, one month suspended sentence

Unbelievable

Sleepy

11 previous convictions, assaults a garda and walks? FFS, no wonder these scumbags have no fear of the Gardaí.

Pawwed Rig

I think that is the norm in Ireland. You often hear of people with 50+ previous convictions given (yet) another slap on the wrist. 'Sure I had a hard upbringing your honour'

tritium

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

I think that is the norm in Ireland. You often hear of people with 50+ previous convictions given (yet) another slap on the wrist. 'Sure I had a hard upbringing your honour'

Oh I don't disagree but its still somewhat uncommon to get a suspended sentence for attacking a guard. For example, this gent had 1 previous conviction and also had drink taken

http://m.wexfordpeople.ie/news/courts/sentence-is-increased-for-garda-assault-31040021.html
Or this one

[url]Http://www.shannonside.ie/news/army-private-appeals-assault-sentence-alleging-garda-misconduct/[/url]

All scummy behaviour but hard to see how these merited a more severe sentence (yes I'll concede that the exact nature of each assault is somewhat unclear, however a more severe offence would be expected to have additional charges)

Sleepy

For an unarmed Garda force to be respected and obeyed, an assault on the member of the force has to be taken more seriously than an assault on an ordinary citizen. Even the lightest of assaults has to result in prison time imo.

ancapailldorcha

Sleepy wrote: »

For an unarmed Garda force to be respected and obeyed, an assault on the member of the force has to be taken more seriously than an assault on an ordinary citizen. Even the lightest of assaults has to result in prison time imo.

Not when Una Mullally and her like are frothing at the bit to spout nonsense like "patriarchal oppression" and so on...

Sleepy

A bit would probably be the best solution to Una Mullally tbh...

Pawwed Rig

Ah now aul Una would blame the Gaurd for casting the shadow of rape on the poor woman

tritium

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Ah now aul Una would blame the Gaurd for casting the shadow of rape on the poor woman

The wonderful Una is at it again in her latest IT opinion piece using the Karen Begley killing to solemnly tell us all how women must live in fear of dastardly men. Strangely there was a less high profile, closer to home murder in the last week or so down in Phibsboro. Victim was a man there, and the accused was a woman. Una seems to have been unaware of that one. My guess is she was hidden away at home crafting a piece on another case awaiting sentence today, just to tell men how depraved we all are....

Then again this is a journalist who not that long ago managed to blame the patriarchy for women who hit their partners.....

py2006

Says it all really...

Any time I write about violence against women, there’s a volley of abuse in the comments on The Irish Times website. Some people just don’t want to hear about it. Some people clearly want to maintain the status quo that women, already generally physically weaker and smaller than men, must be shouted down when they talk about their fears and how unfair it is that violence against women and the murder of women and the rape of women are epidemics. What are we doing to protect women at nighttime in urban areas? Obviously the bulk of this task lies with men. If men didn’t harass, attack or kill women, then we wouldn’t have a problem. But they do. These nightmares become real. And the onus to make them not happen is almost exclusively placed on women.

iptba

tritium wrote: »

The wonderful Una is at it again in her latest IT opinion piece using the Karen Begley killing to solemnly tell us all how women must live in fear of dastardly men. Strangely there was a less high profile, closer to home murder in the last week or so down in Phibsboro. Victim was a man there, and the accused was a woman. Una seems to have been unaware of that one. My guess is she was hidden away at home crafting a piece on another case awaiting sentence today, just to tell men how depraved we all are....

Then again this is a journalist who not that long ago managed to blame the patriarchy for women who hit their partners.....

(from a Dec 2013 article)

In a just-published book, Defending Battered Women on Trial, University of Ottawa law professor Elizabeth Sheehy argues that chronically battered women should have a “statutory escape hatch” if they kill their male abusers pre-emptively rather than “live in anticipatory dread and hypervigilance.”

That is, battered women should be allowed to get away with statutory murder — killing their abuser not in spontaneous self-defence during a crisis, say, but premeditatedly killing the man in his sleep, an action that would incur a murder charge for anyone else. A number of sympathetic Canadian courts have already exonerated such women de facto. Sheehy would like the practice to be entrenched de jure.

Article (by a woman) complains about the viewpoint

http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/barbara-kay-battered-women-should-not-get-away-with-statutory-murder

Also, if it's accepted that women can injure and sometimes kill men in domestic abuse situations, the same defence could apply to men i.e. they could be allowed kill their abuser preemptively. But Elizabeth Sheehy only talks about battered women.

zeffabelli

Alberto Rapid Supporter wrote: »

As if there are no vulnerable men and fathers in prison??? Not to mention, prison conditions are far worse in male prisons than in women's. Just compare Mount Joy to Dochas, could you imagine the outrage if women were made slop out as men are in Mountjoy? Also, Dochas is not even called a prison, it's referred to as the Dochas Centre.

Irish prison needs massive reform. I don't even think in Gunatenemo they are made to slop out.

Neither men nor women should be treated so punitively.

Prison does not rehabilitate and we know this and yet we keep on with this system rather than looking for a way to restoritive justice.

NachoBusiness

An interesting update on a case I posted on the thread a few months ago..

NachoBusiness wrote: »

UK woman gives 14 year old boy alcohol, repeatedly has sex with him, but you guessed it, she walks..

Was in somewhat of a position of of authority also and so that makes it even worse.

The Attorney General appealed the nonsense sentence as being too lenient and the court of appeal judges condemned the female judge, implying she had a sexist mindset:

A corporal’s wife was jailed for three years yesterday for having sex with the 14-year-old son of a soldier – after a judge said her original suspended sentence was ‘unjustifiably’ soft.

Caroline Salisbury, 28, was given a two-year suspended sentence in March for sleeping with the teenager, whom she met on a school bus at a British military base in Germany.

But at the Court of Appeal yesterday, that sentence was overturned for being ‘too lenient’. Instead, three senior judges sentenced her to three years in prison with immediate effect.

The court also heard how Royal Military Police warned Salisbury away from the 14-year-old twice after being told what was happening, but did not arrest her.

Salisbury covered her head with her pink jacket as she was carted off into a police van and led to the cells from the Royal Courts of Justice in London.

Sir Brian Leveson told the appeals court: ‘There was absolutely no justification whatsoever to reaching… anything like two years.

‘In our judgment, the very least sentence which could be passed is one of three years imprisonment.’

Sir Brian, sitting with Mr Justice Kenneth Parker and Mr Justice Stewart, added: ‘I have never seen such a case like it.

‘I have never seen a case where an offender has been warned by the police, where the conduct is of real gravity, not once but twice.’

He listed a host of aggravating features, including her attempts to delete sordid Facebook conversations and her ‘revolting’ attempt to claim that the boy had raped her.

This accusation collapsed when a Facebook video message she sent to him was found, saying: ‘I cannot wait for you to f*** me again.’ She had also told the boy not to go to the police, claiming she would have her children taken away.

Judge Advocate Emma Peters, sitting at a service civilian court in Colchester in March, took pity on Salisbury and gave her a two-year jail term, suspended for two years.

At the hearing yesterday, Oliver Glasgow, counsel for the Attorney General, said: ‘It is a bizarre situation when the Royal Military Police are alerted to a sexual relationship between an adult and a child and what they do is issue a warning rather than taking matters further.’

The judge also criticised Judge Advocate Peters, who had called the sentencing guidelines ‘brutal’ at the original hearing.

He added: ‘I wonder if she would have said that they were brutal if it was a male and a 13-year-old girl.’

py2006

So even though she was warned twice and even went so far as to falsely accuse the boy of raping her she still only gets the least they could give her, 3 years?

WOW!

ancapailldorcha

I was expecting her to get the usual "she's a victim" treatment.

newport2

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I was expecting her to get the usual "she's a victim" treatment.

She may yet if the Guardian covers it. I expect they'll turn a blind eye though, it'll contradict too many of their mantras.

NachoBusiness

It's official! The British Court of Appeal is reading this thread.

NachoBusiness wrote: »

Yet another case of a women having sex with a 15 year old boy and not having to serve time.

However, yesterday:

Married mum-of-two who slept with schoolboy, 15, is jailed for two-and-a-half years

A married mum-of-two who slept with a vulnerable 15-year-old schoolboy has been jailed for two and a half years.

Kelly Jane Richards was initially spared jail for her relationship with the teenager but her punishment was changed after top judges ruled the first sentence "unduly lenient".

The 36-year-old from Rhondda Cynon Taf in Wales had admitted engaging in sexual activity with a child.

She was handed a two-year suspended sentence and a sexual offences prevention order, after the Crown Court judge decided to be lenient.

But she has now been given a jail term by judges sitting at London’s Court of Appeal, reports Wales Online .

The court heard she started a relationship with the teenager, regularly contacting him on his mobile phone and through Facebook and Twitter, in 2012.

When the boy’s mother became concerned about his ‘secretive’ behaviour and confiscated his mobile phone, Richards bought him a sim card so they could remain in touch.

Their illicit relationship was discovered after the mother grew more suspicious and recorded one of their phone conversations.

She went to the police and the boy, who was described as being “particularly vulnerable”, eventually told officers what had happened.

Lord Justice Davis told the court that, while Richards behaviour might not have been grooming in the usual sense of the word, her actions towards the teenager were sexually provocative in the weeks before and after they had sex.

Lawyers representing the Attorney General, Jeremy Wright QC, argued that, in light of all these factors, the Crown Court judge should have imposed a stiffer sentence.

Richards’ lawyers said the judge had showed a degree of mercy, taking account of the fact she is the mother of two children and suffers anxiety and depression.

But, jailing Richards, Lord Justice Davis said that, even taking into account all of the mitigating features, her original sentence was unduly lenient.

Seriously though. Good to see these appeals lately.

Now if only those three women that walked free after used the curling tongs on the 18 year old could have their community orders appealed for being unduly lenient also.

iptba

OK, this is from a long time ago, and many of you probably know this already, but it was news to me* so imagine it would be for some other people too:

Constance Markievicz

(after the 1916 Easter Rising)

She was sentenced to death, but General Maxwell commuted this to life in prison on "account of the prisoner's sex".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constance_Markievicz

*History isn't my thing

iptba

Yesterday, Judge Martin Nolan suspended one year of a two-year sentence on Ward after noting his previous convictions. He said that there must be some deterrence for this type of crime. He suspended fully the two-year sentence for Ivory, noting she has no previous convictions and that "somebody has to mind the children".

[..]

The court heard that if the couple's claim had been successful they could each have been awarded up to €15,000.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/man-jailed-for-crash-fraud-after-being-rumbled-on-facebook-page-34238795.html

As he had a previous conviction while she didn't, it seems fair that he got a heavier sentence. But again we see a woman's total sentence being suspended because "somebody had to mind the children". I remember when a surgeon and his wife were convicted of fraud a few years back, he got four years (I think it was) while her sentence was suspended completely as they had one or more children. I think it would be fairer if sentences were divided up a bit rather than the woman's sentence being completely suspended.

Sleepy

Or, better again, both criminals could serve their sentences whilst the kids are taken into care, cared for by family.

Yes, of course this would be traumatic for the children but if we allow convicted criminals to escape justice on the basis of them having children: (a) it discriminates against those without children (b) it teaches the kids that the justice system is nothing to fear (c) it encourages the very people we don't want to raise children to breed like rabbits.

py2006

Woman who attempted to abduct a 2 year old from a Creche is released on bail.

If it were a man...



http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/woman-attempted-to-abduct-toddler-from-childcare-facility-in-dublin-709502.html?utm_source=androidapp&utm_medium=share&utm_campaign=sharebutton

silverharp

py2006 wrote: »

Woman who attempted to abduct a 2 year old from a Creche is released on bail.

If it were a man...



http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/woman-attempted-to-abduct-toddler-from-childcare-facility-in-dublin-709502.html?utm_source=androidapp&utm_medium=share&utm_campaign=sharebutton

if you think about it, if you had kids that yoke is as bad as having a pedo living next door to you and her name isnt released???

py2006

silverharp wrote: »

if you think about it, if you had kids that yoke is as bad as having a pedo living next door to you and her name isnt released???

Yea they rarely release the name and always look to evoke sympathy by bringing up mental illness etc.

It reminds me of a recent case of a female teacher having sex with an underage boy (13) and the article was going on about how she was just looking for love and attention and going through a bad time in her life.

Pawwed Rig

The 10pm to 7am curfew will keep crèches safe anyway.

PinkLemonade

silverharp wrote: »

if you think about it, if you had kids that yoke is as bad as having a pedo living next door to you and her name isnt released???

As bad a Pedophile? Really? Do you understand what your saying?

silverharp

PinkLemonade wrote: »

As bad a Pedophile? Really? Do you understand what your saying?

If you had kids and didn't know who she was, why not? A nightmare scenario is she suggests she will babysit your kids and you come back to an empty house......

PinkLemonade

silverharp wrote: »

If you had kids and didn't know who she was, why not? A nightmare scenario is she suggests she will babysit your kids and you come back to an empty house......

I wouldn't categorize the mentally ill with paedophiles

Pawwed Rig

PinkLemonade wrote: »

As bad a Pedophile? Really? Do you understand what your saying?

Abducting your child?? Of course that is as bad if not worse than them being abused. You can work with an abuse victim but the agony of never knowing where your child is our even if they are alive or dead would be unbearable. I would assume that someone inclined to abduct a child is not going to be a model parent to the child either.

py2006

We also don't know her intentions. the assumption is she isn't a pedophile

weemcd

Yes

newport2

PinkLemonade wrote: »

I wouldn't categorize the mentally ill with paedophiles

I wouldn't consider a paedophile to be mentally sound.

newport2

py2006 wrote: »

We also don't know her intentions. the assumption is she isn't a pedophile

Of course. Just as if it was a man the assumption would be he was.

Even the Guardian acknowledges the assumption all paedophiles are men is misleading.

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2009/oct/04/uk-female-child-sex-offenders

Researchers from the Lucy Faithfull Foundation (LFF), a child protection charity that deals with British female sex offenders, said its studies confirmed that a "fair proportion" of child abusers were women. Donald Findlater, director of research and development, said results indicated that up to 20% of a conservative estimate of 320,000 suspected UK paedophiles were women.

py2006

If you have the Daily Mail app (of course you don't by the paper) over the last few years there has been countless articles on female teachers abusing their students, some as young as 11. While I know this doesn't necessarily equate to paedophilia, it does demonstrate that the notion that only men abuse is quite wrong.

ALiasEX

PinkLemonade wrote: »

I wouldn't categorize the mentally ill with paedophiles

What makes you think her mental illness caused her to do it?

PinkLemonade

ALiasEX wrote: »

What makes you think her mental illness caused her to do it?

Statistics

newport2

Found with over 1/3 kg of cocaine with intent to supply after a confidential tip-off. Judge says he'll take "a chance on her" and lets her go home with a suspended sentence.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/tennis-club-employee-spared-jail-for-holding-onto-26000-of-cocaine-to-repay-drug-debt-34296200.html

Clarke pleaded guilty at Dublin Circuit Criminal Court to possession of 372 grams of cocaine for sale or supply on October 7, 2014 at her home
.....
The judge said the higher courts had ruled that the offence must lead to an immediate prison term and that Clarke “richly” deserved a custodial sentence.
However, he said he was going to take a chance on her because of her young son and her voluntary community work and imposed a five year suspended sentence.

Sleepy

Honestly, reading the article, I think a suspended sentence and some mandatory drug addiction treatment / counselling would be an appropriate sentence for that case whether the perpetrator was a man or a woman. She was clearly acting under coercion. I'd be surprised to see a man treated so reasonably however.

newport2

Sleepy wrote: »

Honestly, reading the article, I think a suspended sentence and some mandatory drug addiction treatment / counselling would be an appropriate sentence for that case whether the perpetrator was a man or a woman. She was clearly acting under coercion. I'd be surprised to see a man treated so reasonably however.

That's my point.

I'm probably being too cynical, but I think every time someone is found with drugs with intent to supply the addiction/coercion stories are rolled out.

Sleepy

I think that's an element of the business model tbh. If you're dealing drugs why take the risk of keeping them in your house / car when you can so easily find a desperate sucker to take that risk for you at no cost to yourself?