Probation For Paedo ?

[studmuffin]

I maybe lacking all the facts, but local person convicted of possesing and distributing child porn receives probation (todays radio and courier)

 

Anyone in a position to explain how this crime is punished by probation or am I being naive

[ans]

Maybe you should arm yourself with the facts before commiting your thoughts to a public medium?

[studmuffin]

I have the facts as given to the public like everyone, I merely state that there maybe mitigating facts not reported to the public which would warrant a lenient sentance

[ans]

I have the facts as given to the public

 

I don't remember anything in the report identifying the offender as a paedophile, and the images were classed as indecent, not pornographic.

 

Seems to me you added a bit of flavouring to the facts.

[Politician]

There was something odd about the way the specific charge was reported in the newspapers. It's possible that there may indeed be more to this one than meets the eye.

[studmuffin]

I have the facts as given to the public

 

I don't remember anything in the report identifying the offender as a paedophile, and the images were classed as indecent, not pornographic.

 

Seems to me you added a bit of flavouring to the facts.

 

 

Ans please clarify the difference between indecent and pornographic and tell me why either should not be a custodial sentance ????

[ans]

Ans please clarify the difference between indecent and pornographic and tell me why either should not be a custodial sentance ????

 

You could try a dictionary. The answer to your first question is most likely there.

 

I didn't say either shouldn't be a custodial sentence. I'm just suggesting you've used much more serious terms to describe the incident than the news reports have.

[haX0red_Account]

to be fair ans, don't think a dictionary would clarify it that much- think (might be wrong) that indecency can be tested in law and defined, pornographic cannot be, therefore that's why they use that charge. I got to admit I was a bit surprised, maybe I got it well wrong but on hearing the report on the radio understood that he was already on probation. Presumably the offence was at the lower end of the scale and I'm sure the cops wouldn't have shied away from pursuing it if relevant.

[ccm]

This was the FIRST case of distributing child pornography to be brought to court in the Isle of Man.

 

A clear and simple message sent out from the courts to those thinking about distributing child porn and wondering about the consequences

[Gladys]

to be fair ans, don't think a dictionary would clarify it that much- think (might be wrong) that indecency can be tested in law and defined, pornographic cannot be, therefore that's why they use that charge. I got to admit I was a bit surprised, maybe I got it well wrong but on hearing the report on the radio understood that he was already on probation. Presumably the offence was at the lower end of the scale and I'm sure the cops wouldn't have shied away from pursuing it if relevant.

If there is a charge involving 'pornography', there will be a test and a definition for it, either in statute or case law. The one thing the law does is define, may not be the right (by the man on the Clapham omnibus's view) definition, but there will be a definition.

[LoneWolf]

This was the FIRST case of distributing child pornography to be brought to court in the Isle of Man.

 

A clear and simple message sent out from the courts to those thinking about distributing child porn and wondering about the consequences

 

If, as you say, this is the first such case then its a real shame. Not the sort of first we should be proud of thats for sure.

 

Sentencing is something different. I always thought the Deemster was responsible for setting length and severity of sentence but someone has told me they now work to guidelines. Is that correct ?

You certainly arent the only person with concerns about the manner in which law courts conduct their business. Apart from anything else these people have the ability to directly impact on our lives whether its because of their sentencing policy or by some judge made law that might constrain our actions.

Isnt it time deemsters were made accountable to the community and had to stand for election ?

[Gladys]

This was the FIRST case of distributing child pornography to be brought to court in the Isle of Man.

 

A clear and simple message sent out from the courts to those thinking about distributing child porn and wondering about the consequences

 

If, as you say, this is the first such case then its a real shame. Not the sort of first we should be proud of thats for sure.

 

Sentencing is something different. I always thought the Deemster was responsible for setting length and severity of sentence but someone has told me they now work to guidelines. Is that correct ?

You certainly arent the only person with concerns about the manner in which law courts conduct their business. Apart from anything else these people have the ability to directly impact on our lives whether its because of their sentencing policy or by some judge made law that might constrain our actions.

Isnt it time deemsters were made accountable to the community and had to stand for election ?

God forbid that we politicise the judiciary! Difficult enough to get people to the polls to vote for MHKs without adding the Deemsters! Also, can you imagine the electioneering?!

 

As for a judge making law or applying his own sentencing policy, I think most judges would say that they are interpreters and implementers of the law, their own responses being limited by the law (statute or case law) they are applying. Where there is scope for discretion, it is always possible to argue about how that discretion is applied.

 

I don't know much about the case in question, so I couldn't comment about the appropriateness of the sentence, but would agree that it is a very unwelcome first for the Island.

[LoneWolf]

God forbid that we politicise the judiciary! Difficult enough to get people to the polls to vote for MHKs without adding the Deemsters! Also, can you imagine the electioneering?!

 

As for a judge making law or applying his own sentencing policy, I think most judges would say that they are interpreters and implementers of the law, their own responses being limited by the law (statute or case law) they are applying. Where there is scope for discretion, it is always possible to argue about how that discretion is applied.

 

I don't know much about the case in question, so I couldn't comment about the appropriateness of the sentence, but would agree that it is a very unwelcome first for the Island.

 

Judge's do make law. Admittedly not statute law but law nevertheless. I think youll find case law is judge made law.

That fact alone really makes the argument that judges should be elected from a suitable qualified body.

Seems to work ok in some parts of the world.

[Gladys]

God forbid that we politicise the judiciary! Difficult enough to get people to the polls to vote for MHKs without adding the Deemsters! Also, can you imagine the electioneering?!

 

As for a judge making law or applying his own sentencing policy, I think most judges would say that they are interpreters and implementers of the law, their own responses being limited by the law (statute or case law) they are applying. Where there is scope for discretion, it is always possible to argue about how that discretion is applied.

 

I don't know much about the case in question, so I couldn't comment about the appropriateness of the sentence, but would agree that it is a very unwelcome first for the Island.

 

Judge's do make law. Admittedly not statute law but law nevertheless. I think youll find case law is judge made law.

That fact alone really makes the argument that judges should be elected from a suitable qualified body.

Seems to work ok in some parts of the world.

I think you will find the scope for making case law is limited by precedent and that much of case law is an interpretation of existing case law to the current facts. As such, it is an evolutionary process. There are very few ground-breaking, law-making decisions, certainly in the lower courts, as it is only as a case moves up through the appeals process does a decision set a precedent. My point is that judges do not see themselves as capricious law makers, but interpreters.

[LoneWolf]

I think you will find the scope for making case law is limited by precedent and that much of case law is an interpretation of existing case law to the current facts. As such, it is an evolutionary process. There are very few ground-breaking, law-making decisions, certainly in the lower courts, as it is only as a case moves up through the appeals process does a decision set a precedent. My point is that judges do not see themselves as capricious law makers, but interpreters.

 

The net effect though is that judges make law which impacts on the rest of us.

Other places seem to believe in democracy and elect judges.

 

Elect a Judge

 

My point is that judges should be made accountable to the communities they are supposed to be serving.