What a ridiculous sentence 🙄

Mackem DJ said:
These abysmal sentences being handed down have been getting worse and worse (or should I say more lax) for 20 years. maybe its just a coincidence that society is breaking down & getting lawless more and more. Must just be a coincidence tbh

Rehabilitation and all that eh!
Click to expand...
Well you might as well chance crime for a bit as the rules allow you to before there’s any punishment.
 


OOOSH YEAH said:
Seen this? So he’s breached the order not to visit her twice. Turns up at her house with an axe, hurt the dogs and rang her 75 times. Says he’s got 35 convic for assault. The lass even says ‘will this end with me dead’ the judge gave him 12 months suspended sentence.

www.chroniclelive.co.uk

Man threw former partner's dogs at drawers while breaching ban on contacting her

Lee Purvis, of Wallsend, admitted three offences of breaching a non-molestation order and common assault
www.chroniclelive.co.uk www.chroniclelive.co.uk

The bloke needs to be locked up while given help with his mental health. He will obviously do this again until he kills her. Honestly this has happened loads of times and ended with women losing their lives. Anyone remember Alice Ruggles? Absolutely pathetic.
Click to expand...
Usually describe them as dad of two
What does it take for these people to be locked up after so many offences
 
BlackOps said:
Yup mate


I would hope the defence solicitor raises that as mitigation when commiting a serious GBH. You expect the police not to investigate a GBH? Wow


You see women not phased by claires law
disclosures despite a pattern of previous horrible offences. Or they wont give statements/lie when it clearly happens again. Police just gotta continue giving oportunities everytime for them to break the cycle
Click to expand...
New recruits have to pass an IPS which I think is something that permits them to go out alone. Until then they must be chaperoned or whatever the police call it.
 
Big Jeff said:
New recruits have to pass an IPS which I think is something that permits them to go out alone. Until then they must be chaperoned or whatever the police call it.
Click to expand...

Yeah there is always at least a 10 week tutor period where they must prove they're capable of being independent
 
BlackOps said:
Ive never heard one person or job where ive heard that response. Not once. Out of thousands. Its almost mandatory to arrest someone following a report of domestic incident
Click to expand...

Durham Police won't do anything until I'm physically assaulted. They just tell me to remove myself from the situation to keep myself safe, which means me leaving places that I want to be in because he is there.
Crook Mackem said:
Also think there should be some sort of register for these types where lasses can access and see if any potential partner has been done for owt like this beforehand.
Click to expand...

There is now. It's called Claire's Law after a lady who was murdered by her partner who had a history of violence that she didn't know about. You can ask the Police for the history on a partner and find out any past convictions in order to protect yourself.

It wasn't around at the time, but if it had been and I had used it, I would have ended the relationship before it really got started.
 
Last edited:
OOOSH YEAH said:
Seen this? So he’s breached the order not to visit her twice. Turns up at her house with an axe, hurt the dogs and rang her 75 times. Says he’s got 35 convic for assault. The lass even says ‘will this end with me dead’ the judge gave him 12 months suspended sentence.

www.chroniclelive.co.uk

Man threw former partner's dogs at drawers while breaching ban on contacting her

Lee Purvis, of Wallsend, admitted three offences of breaching a non-molestation order and common assault
www.chroniclelive.co.uk www.chroniclelive.co.uk

The bloke needs to be locked up while given help with his mental health. He will obviously do this again until he kills her. Honestly this has happened loads of times and ended with women losing their lives. Anyone remember Alice Ruggles? Absolutely pathetic.
Click to expand...

That's absolute madness, he simply shouldn't be on the streets. Feels like reading the first half of one of those stories where a man with a ridiculously long record of stalking/harassment/DV then goes on to kill a partner/former partner and police and judicial system then go oh no, this is a tragedy and we should learn from it.
Big Jeff said:
The judge will have followed sentencing guidelines. Clearly these seem inappropriate. So we need to change things. The problem seems to be clear.

Nobody has come up with a workable solution to this very serious issue.

Imprisonment costs the country a fortune and is probably one of the reasons the judges guidelines have resulted in this outcome.

I have no idea how we solve this issue. But clearly something must be done.
Click to expand...

Not so sure. The sentencing guidelines are here, and they're a range where the top end is well above what the judge has given

Apart from the duration of the sentence looking very light against that matrix given the nature of the breach and the aggravating factor of the violence, what the guidelines say about why to suspend are:

realistic prospect of rehabilitation (with 45 previous offences of various kinds? aye right); strong personal mitigation; harmful impact on others (he cares for his grandparents, so it says)

What the guidelines say about why not to suspend, but to imprison immediately:

offender presents a risk/danger to public (tick)
appropriate punishment can only be achieved by custody (tick in my view, given the assaults, axe,record)
history of poor compliance with court orders (well, he breached this one on three occasions)

I think he should have got more than a year, and he should be inside.
 
Last edited:
The King of Um said:
That's absolute madness, he simply shouldn't be on the streets. Feels like reading the first half of one of those stories where a man with a ridiculously long record of stalking/harassment/DV then goes on to kill a partner/former partner and police and judicial system then go oh no, this is a tragedy and we should learn from it.


Not so sure. The sentencing guidelines are here, and they're a range where the top end is well above what the judge has given

Apart from the duration of the sentence looking very light against that matrix given the nature of the breach and the aggravating factor of the violence, what the guidelines say about why to suspend are:

realistic prospect of rehabilitation (with 45 previous offences of various kinds? aye right); strong personal mitigation; harmful impact on others (he cares for his grandparents, so it says)

What the guidelines say about why not to suspend, but to imprison immediately:

offender presents a risk/danger to public (tick)
appropriate punishment can only be achieved by custody (tick in my view, given the assaults, axe,record)
history of poor compliance with court orders (well, he breached this one on three occasions)

I think he should have got more than a year, and he should be inside.
Click to expand...
But did the judge have more information available to him or her than we have seen from newspaper reporting? As usual the lack of facts never deters the court of the SMB!!
 
The King of Um said:
That's absolute madness, he simply shouldn't be on the streets. Feels like reading the first half of one of those stories where a man with a ridiculously long record of stalking/harassment/DV then goes on to kill a partner/former partner and police and judicial system then go oh no, this is a tragedy and we should learn from it.


Not so sure. The sentencing guidelines are here, and they're a range where the top end is well above what the judge has given

Apart from the duration of the sentence looking very light against that matrix given the nature of the breach and the aggravating factor of the violence, what the guidelines say about why to suspend are:

realistic prospect of rehabilitation (with 45 previous offences of various kinds? aye right); strong personal mitigation; harmful impact on others (he cares for his grandparents, so it says)

What the guidelines say about why not to suspend, but to imprison immediately:

offender presents a risk/danger to public (tick)
appropriate punishment can only be achieved by custody (tick in my view, given the assaults, axe,record)
history of poor compliance with court orders (well, he breached this one on three occasions)

I think he should have got more than a year, and he should be inside.
Click to expand...
He should have been locked up. Even just to give the public but mainly his ex a break. Once he’s out tag him and if it goes off again straight back in. Cost to taxpayer doesn’t come into it. The lass needs protection and we need to spend more money on rehabilitation of the perps and our prisons.
 
Another pillar of society, a complete coward and an utter piece of shit.
Bet he’s never rocked up at the house of some huge 20 stone bloke waving an axe around ?
No , but he’s hard as nails threatening females and throwing a dog around. Twat
 
Al Bundy said:
Another pillar of society, a complete coward and an utter piece of shit.
Bet he’s never rocked up at the house of some huge 20 stone bloke waving an axe around ?
No , but he’s hard as nails threatening females and throwing a dog around. Twat
Click to expand...
Nah but he robbed a homeless 17 year old kid for a bag of clothes they’d had donated to him.
Crook Mackem said:
Some scumbag on the front page of the northern echo today jailed for stalking. Piss poor sentence again mind.

Even seems quite proud of himself on his mugshot

Stalker
Click to expand...
How long? You have to subscribe.
 
Last edited:

Back
Top