ccm Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 When are the powers at be gonna sort it out? Manslaughter of wife = 5 years/Death by dangerous driving = 7 years Getting underage girl pregnant = 9 months/Distributing child pornography = probation!!!!???!!! I believe the child porn case is the first on the Island in which someone has distributed this From now on it's gonna be tough convicting anyone on this charge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nipper Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 ..and while I'm on one, Careless driving (or whatever the hell the charge was termed) and killing a perfectly innocent person . . . £1000 and a years ban. (and there are more nasty cases of smug and sneaky injustice . . . ) This Island can be fucken priceless at times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoneWolf Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 When are the powers at be gonna sort it out? Manslaughter of wife = 5 years/Death by dangerous driving = 7 years Getting underage girl pregnant = 9 months/Distributing child pornography = probation!!!!???!!! I believe the child porn case is the first on the Island in which someone has distributed this From now on it's gonna be tough convicting anyone on this charge Not certain which cases you are referring to here ccm. Any details / links ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Celt Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 This Island can be fucken priceless at times. Best comment I've heard the best discribes the Isle of Man, imo. The sad reflection on the Manx Legal System is that We always refer to cases in the UK. As, I'm lead to believe, the the Manx Legal system should be able to stand on it's own due to Manx Law being a different to English Law. So if that's the case, why can't a Local High Balliff, note nothing like the English, pass judgement on what the people of the Isle of Man would seem to be a fit punishment for the said crime? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tugger Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 First of all, you hardly ever hear complaints about punishments being too severe. Most members of the public have knee-jerk reactions and inbuilt prejudices about certain crimes - just look at the difference of opinion you can find here about driving at high speeds. So judges tend to be involved in sentencing, not juries or the populace at large. They are in a better position to apply current sentencing guidelines which by and large will be the same as those in the UK (not for drugs obviously, but for other crimes I imagine the concerns are identical in each jurisdiction). The High Bailiff is no different from an English Stipendiary Magistrate in this regard. That said, there are bound to be balls-ups in any jurisdiction, and the more fuss we make about them, the more pressure there is on the judges not to do it next time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Celt Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 The High Bailiff is no different from an English Stipendiary Magistrate in this regard. I think you missed and might have proved my point. As English Law and Manx Law is different. I can't personally see how you can compare as the title for a start doesn't exist in the Isle of Man. I personally cannot see why the Manx Courts have to reflect on UK sentencing when the Manx Legal system is different. Why? We're not part of Europe to that exstent are We? I've always thought that a "Sentence" should reflect on what the Public Opinion would be be. However, this seems to faulty on both sides of the Irish Sea, imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spatula girl Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 Manslaughter of wife is Lindon and Webb on the Ballamodha straight got seven years The other two I saw on the Energy FM news page Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theskeat Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 And whats going to happen to the CMs case, will justice be done and if so the correct sentence if found guilty, I doubt it. To many people on the Island live in each others pockets Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonan3 Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 Slightly off-topic, perhaps - but one of the things that fascinates me is the way that certain prosecutions do not manage to be reported in the local press. I've had a particular interest in one or two cases in recent times that involved motoring offences - one, specifically, that involved driving under the influence - that never made it into the local papers. I know that the person involved was found guilty, I know that he was sentenced and is currently unable to drive, but his public reputation appears to remain intact due to the facts not being reported in the local press. He is not a politician, nor a member of the emergency services - but he does appear to have a lot of 'influential friends.' Strangest of all, perhaps - I wasn't the least bit surprised that the papers couldn't find room to report his misdeeds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Posters Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 If a persons' conviction is on public record (at the Registry) is there a problem naming them? Just because the press haven't reported it, doesn't mean it can't be discussed after the case has finished Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theskeat Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 Slightly off-topic, perhaps - but one of the things that fascinates me is the way that certain prosecutions do not manage to be reported in the local press. I've had a particular interest in one or two cases in recent times that involved motoring offences - one, specifically, that involved driving under the influence - that never made it into the local papers.I know that the person involved was found guilty, I know that he was sentenced and is currently unable to drive, but his public reputation appears to remain intact due to the facts not being reported in the local press. He is not a politician, nor a member of the emergency services - but he does appear to have a lot of 'influential friends.' Strangest of all, perhaps - I wasn't the least bit surprised that the papers couldn't find room to report his misdeeds. Name and shame Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nipper Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 Slightly off-topic, perhaps - but one of the things that fascinates me is the way that certain prosecutions do not manage to be reported in the local press. I've had a particular interest in one or two cases in recent times that involved motoring offences - one, specifically, that involved driving under the influence - that never made it into the local papers.I know that the person involved was found guilty, I know that he was sentenced and is currently unable to drive, but his public reputation appears to remain intact due to the facts not being reported in the local press. He is not a politician, nor a member of the emergency services - but he does appear to have a lot of 'influential friends.' Strangest of all, perhaps - I wasn't the least bit surprised that the papers couldn't find room to report his misdeeds. "Social reports". that usually does the trick. So the next referred court is not public. And of course, rightly so in most cases. But the Sneaky and his pals know how to play the system!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ripsaw Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 Careless driving (or whatever the hell the charge was termed) and killing a perfectly innocent person . . . £1000 and a years ban. (and there are more nasty cases of smug and sneaky injustice . . . ) Due to the lack of a link being supplied I don't have a clue about the circumstances of the offence and case, but I'm weary about anger towards somebody found guilty of Careless Driving, especially when it is accompanied by a comment such as "or whatever the hell the charge was termed" Am I right in thinking that: If I am within 20MPH in a Home Zone and at the exact moment that a child runs infront of my car I sneeze thus I don't know that the child is there. I am guilty of Careless Driving and the sentence should reflect the lack of 'intent' that caused the accident. The driving was either 'Dangerous' or 'Careless', if you are not sure which it was then how can we read your post and agree with your belief that the sentence was overly lenient? I would agree that if I was to go tear arsing along Victoria Street and knock down a pedestrian on the crossing then I should be found guilty of Dangerous Driving and have the book thrown at me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ans Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 Well have none of that reason and thought in these sorts of threads thank you Ripsaw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pontiuspilot Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 ..and while I'm on one, Careless driving (or whatever the hell the charge was termed) and killing a perfectly innocent person . . . £1000 and a years ban. (and there are more nasty cases of smug and sneaky injustice . . . ) This Island can be fucken priceless at times. remember it was proved in court that his car was at fault, mechanical failure caused the accident. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.