Counting Cats in Zanzibar Rotating Header Image

Crime

The mistake of John Jay – believing that the governement could make people virtuous.

The American Founding Father John Jay was fond of reading Plato in his youth (often not a good sign), and even named one of his slaves Plato (I am not attacking Mr Jay over slavery – I know he did more than anyone else to end slavery in New York State, even losing an election over it).

It is not likely that John Jay was fond of the economic collectivism of Plato (after all John Jay was the man famous for making “those who own the land should govern it” his maxim – although it was actually G. Morris who supported a strictly limited franchise, as long you owned a little land, say your own home, you should have the vote according to Jay), so what was he getting from Plato?

Not the idea of the importance of virtue – that was a commonplace of republican (small “r”) thought, that only a moral people could remain free (that a people addicted to vice and waste would either not notice government getting more powerful – or would actively welcome a despotic government, if it promised them lots of benefits “bread and games”).

Nor was John Jay some sort of “Puritan” in the Hollywood sense – he did not believe that such things as drink and dancing should be banned, he liked a drink and he employed tutors to teach his children to dance (and the only reason he did not go to the theatre was that he believed there was so much suffering and humiliation in real life that he did not want to see it on the stage as well). Again “virtue” was a much broader concept than the Hollywood mockery of po faced Puritans.

What Plato would have given John Jay is that idea that people can (and should) be made virtuous by THE STATE.

We today are used to prisons and government schools (especially in New York) being dens of vice – and that is not funny (rape and so on should not be a matter for nudge-nudge, wink-wink jokes). Places where vast amounts of taxpayers money are spent – and people come out vastly worse than they went in. Indeed the only thing that government schools in America appear to be good at teaching people is that government should control everything and that business (especially “big business”) is evil (needing to be controlled by noble government), and the churches are evil too, and…… (well any alternative to the state in any area of life) is evil – how odd that government schools should teach that government should control everything (well actually not odd at all).

However, dens of vice was not the Platonic vision (although what American schools and colleges actually teach would have pleased Plato).

In the vision of John Jay the government prisons he established (to replace the old policy of either hanging or flogging criminals) were meant to “reform” criminals.

And the government school system he longed for (it was not really established till after his time) would take children and turn them into virtuous citizens of the new republic .

What if someone from the state had come to Mr Jay’s farm (the house he had built shows his reputation as an aristocrat is false – it is a rather ordinary house with a front pouch where someone can sit on a rocking chair and chat to passers by – the house that “Common Man” Jefferson had built is vastly grander, but then Jefferson did not mind borrowing money, John Jay hated the idea of borrowing for luxury, he would only spend money he actually had) and started to order him about in farming matters?

I think such a government official would have got a cold stare from the man who attacked price controls and other such nonsense (John Adams would have lost his temper and set the dogs on such an official). But why should government be better at forming human character?

If would not trust the government to be in charge of your carrots, why would you trust them to be in charge of your children?

Governments are often better than private individuals and associations for destructive things – killing people, burning cities and so on (as a man who had lived through war – Mr Jay knew that), but for constructive things such as reforming human character? That does not seem very likely.

Evil (force and fear) has its place in human affairs – remember the Star Trek episode where Captain Kirk is divided between good and evil. His good side has many things (for example a sincere love of knowledge for its own sake) – even his courage (the evil Kirk is a coward – terrified of losing his own skin), but the good Kirk is also useless as a Star Ship commander (he will not take risks with other people’s lives – and he is horrified even by the suffering and death of enemies). It is the evil Kirk who has the “power of command” and the delight in torment and destruction that gives him the incentive to think up clever ways of destroying foes (the pleasure a cat has). And these-things-are-necessary at times.

The state (force and fear – the Sword of State) is the negative (destructive) energy of human life – you can burn a city with such a force, but you can not make people better (not really) you can not create new and good things. Force and fear has its place in human life (the good Kirk can not command the Enterprise – although the evil Kirk can not be trusted to do so) – but it can not turn a child into a good adult, or turn criminals into honest people (it can just turn them into hypocrites like Mr Heap – pretending to be “ever so humble” as they plot fresh crimes).

If one tries to use the state for positive (for constructive) purposes the negative energy feeds back on itself – the tormented child becomes a vile adult, the criminal leaves the prison worse than when he went in (and so on). The state can punish crime – but it can reform people (and the effort to use state power to “make people better” leads to the most terrible tyranny, as C.S. Lewis pointed out).

Those people (such as John Jay) who supported setting up state prison systems and school systems sincerely believing that they would promote virtue were making an error – a terrible, fundamental, error (an error for which the world is still suffering  – and will suffer more).

Free apologist with every rape

Rotherham Child Abuse Scandal - Ring A

“Several staff described their nervousness about identifying the ethnic origins of perpetrators for fear of being thought as racist; others remembered clear direction from their managers not to do so.”

Rotherham child abuse scandal: 1,400 children exploited, report finds

There is a reason that “Lady Justice” wears a blindfold, it is so that both prejudice and favour are ignored in the legal system and one of the reasons why the Anglo-Saxon legal system has established itself around the world.

Unfortunately, the same rules do not apply to the politically correct who see a “narrative” at every turn, indeed is a “Social Worker” not the very epitome of the Fabian state writ large?

The net effect of such deliberate and wilful ignorance was that a significant number of children were subjected to violence, sexual abuse and coercion because the public appointed and empowered enforcers of the law were colour-blind to their actions because they were Muslims.

Without committing acts of outrage myself, it is impossible to continue, but suffice to say that until political correctness and random acts of racism are removed from both law and public service – for what else is “Child Services” – or whatever the current politically correct euphemism?

There may well be a place for social workers, but it is within the voluntary sector of the 19th century rather than the state enabled child abductors of the 21st.

What’s the German for Schadenfreude?

You’d need a heart of stone not to laugh at the demise of Max Clifford. The git is goin’ dahn for 8 counts of sexual assault.

Millionaire publicist manipulated women and girls into performing sex acts with promises he would introduce them to showbiz stars.

Clifford, 71, was convicted following a six-week trial that exposed the “terrible, festering secret” that he was a paedophile who bullied and manipulated teenage girls into performing sex acts.

Apparently he accused his accusers of being “fantasists only in it for the money”. That’s rich coming from you Max! His defence basically consisted of his QC claiming things like, “It was a different age…” and accused the police of a witch hunt* and of people taking a “prurient interest in his sex-life”. Oh, the irony! The number of careers and lives he has wrecked over decades by doing just that…

The publicist left the courtroom without speaking to the press, hurrying into a private room with his legal team as his supporters – including several employees – waited outside, some in tears.

Once outside, Clifford refused to make a statement. “I’ve been told by my lawyers to say nothing at all.

Well, that’ll be a first! Max Clifford lost for words. Perhaps almost as much as the chokey he receives that is almost as devastating to this vile and utterly egotistical man. And it will (I sincerely hope) be a long-time in chokey. All the girls and women were young and vulnerable and one was 15. They are considering a case where the jury was hung and that involved a 14 year old girl. There is also an accusation of of abusing a 14 year old but the jury was hung on that and they are considering what to do about that. And also the accusation that he abused a 12 year old in a Jacuzzi in Spain but for that he couldn’t be prosecuted.

Clifford destroyed lives and careers at whim. He is utterly vile. One only need to look at the Stuart Lubbock case or David Mellor to see his amorality and hypocrisy. And it is good he finally got his comeuppance.

Let Clifford rot in Hell.

Sometimes people do get their righteous comeuppance.

*There may be an element of truth in that as Operation Yewtree had yet to secure a conviction.

The “Victimology” lens

Nigel Evans

As lurid details spilled out about the MP’s struggles with alcohol and his sexuality, his accusers – five of whom were friends – played down the incidents to the point of levity. “It was like we were out one night and the shadow secretary of state for Wales put his hand down my trousers. Crazy, crazy Westminster. It seemed so funny,” said the first alleged victim.

How the case against Nigel Evans fell apart

Speaking as a representative of Team Pink, I’ve never tried this particular approach on anyone, no matter how drunk I might have been, because I’ve found that a punch in the face often offends.

If every rugby club prank or drunken fumble of the sexually curious was to be brought to trial then the courts would be overflowing.

I think the men reluctantly dragged into this by the Palace of Westminster Police, who categorically refused to be victims and said so on the stand were quite correct, but their refusal to be victims undermined the main allegation of rape and made both the police and CPS appear foolish – correctly and understandably in my view, although not in the view of the execrable Alison Saunders, Head of the UK’s Crown Prosecution Service.

Alison Saunders: CPS ‘was right to take Evans case to court’

Time for this rape hysteria to be brought to an end as it undermines the genuine cases. The fact that these matters were escalated from bar room gossip to sexual assault charges by Sarah Wollaston MP (a “GP with 20 years’ experience including a spell working as a police forensic examiner where she dealt with victims of sexual and domestic violence”) does not surprise me. If, like Wollaston you go around viewing every aspect of life through a lens of “victimology” then you will find victims everywhere you look.

This is not to suggest that the rape charge against Evans should have been ignored, but by bundling it along with these other spurious and largely inconsequential events, presumably to establish Evans as a sexual predator in the years prior to the rape allegation then the CPS and police have undermined their case rather than enhanced it.

After all, juries live in the real world rather than that defined by the “Rape Culture” viewpoint of Alison Saunders.

Religious Exemptions in Law – Is Mr. Singh to blame?

Sikh Motorcycle Club

A group of religious fanatics terrorise the community :-)

Further to the brouhaha over at York University in Toronto, I got to thinking about the problem of religious exemptions in law and the various compromises that have arisen trying to balance the rules of secular society without violating freedom of religion. (more…)

Hoist upon one’s own…

A man who has been jailed for raping a woman is waiting to find out whether he has contracted HIV from her.

Richard Thomas was sentenced to five years and four months after admitting raping the woman at her home in Leigh, Greater Manchester.

He knew she was ill but did not know she had HIV and collapsed when police told him, Liverpool Crown Court heard.

Words fail. Raping someone you know to be ill is about the definition of “despicable”.

The sentence does seem insufficient. But the dying swan act must have been an hilarity for the coppers. As to the perp, well I could well play a concerto on this instrument.

Sowell: “Studies Prove…”

Often we hear that “all the experts agree” that A is better than B or that “studies prove” A to be better than B. ….

A fascinating discussion of the fact that statistical studies can be interpreted and presented in various ways…with varying degrees of rigor and of intellectual honesty…for various reasons. Dr. Sowell provides some excellent examples in this three-part article.

Part 1: http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell080906.php3

Part 2: http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell081006.php3

Part 3: http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell081106.php3

Thatcher’s greatest achievement ~ it’s not what you think

Many more eloquent writers with first hand experience will have eulogised Baroness Thatcher, and rightly so.  The Falklands, the privatisations, the tax cuts, the near destruction of the trade union movement as an effective political force and the enormous economic turnaround have all been well covered as has the poll tax.  Most commentators have either missed or minimised the financial deregulation that made London the financial capital of the world, and the revenue this generated.  Neither should achieving public sector debt repayments (sic) as opposed to today’s endless borrowing and QE be forgotten.

And most commentators be they natural allies, conservative opponents or indeed members of the Labour party have behaved with decorum more or less.  Most have, one or two vile specimens have not.

Case the first, would be the cretinous socialist worker types who were dancing on the streets.  Most could barely have been alive at the time, this is purely thoughtless Pavlovianism.  It doesn’t make it right, just brainless.

Case the second would be the people in former mining communities.  Now it is certainly true that pit closures would and did devastate pit towns.  But this seemed to me to be more or less unavoidable.  The raison d’etre for the towns was the mine.  When the economic case for the pit goes, so frankly does the town.  Some interviewees could not get past the hatred, most had not moved on*.  They were fat, indolent and unemployed.  The media talked about their shorter life expectancies.  Yep, no exercise, crappy diet, smoking and boozing will do that.  Hardly the Lady’s fault all these years later.  I felt sorry for them.  Betrayed by their erstwhile leaders, they were effectively living in the past, wishing for a bygone era that will never return.  They will die bitter.

Case the third, Gerry Adams.  I guess when you are a former bomber it is unrealistic to expect decent behaviour, or even a straight response.  We got neither from this scumbag.  He made a statement about how Thatcher had allowed the hunger strikers to die.  That slightly understated his own responsibility and was to put it mildly, disingenuous.  He also skipped right past his friends attempt to murder her in Brighton.

Case the fourth, and the worst by far in some pretty rum company, Neil Kinnock.  This two-time whining failure made some ludicrous sixth-form type remarks about how the poor got poorer under Thatcher.  Needless to say they got much, much richer but such a stranglehold on reality perhaps explains why the people of the UK said ‘No’ to Neil, twice in succession.  And despite all the money sucked from the public teat for him and the entire family, he still wasn’t happy.  And then it struck me, perhaps the Lady’s greatest achievement was kicking out Callaghan, obliterating the ludicrous Michael Foot and trouncing Neil “two-time-loser” Kinnock**.  Keeping these hoons out of Downing Street may indeed have been her best.

* Of course I appreciate this was not a representative sample.  Those who had moved on, had in all probability, left the area.

** Yes, I appreciate it was Major who beat Kinnock second time around.  I itself a tribute to rank incompetence, being beaten by the grey man.

One law for us…

…and another for them.

A muslim who raped a 13-year-old girl he groomed on Facebook has been spared a prison sentence after a judge heard he went to an Islamic faith school where he  was taught that women are worthless.

I don’t recall that being included in the national curriculum.

Adil Rashid, 18, claimed he was not aware that it was illegal for him to have sex with the girl because his education left him ignorant of British law.

Where’s he been living?  Under a rock?  In some dark cave?  Has he never watched TV or read a newspaper?

Yesterday Judge Michael Stokes handed Rashid a suspended sentence, saying: ‘Although chronologically 18, it is quite clear from the reports that you are very naive and immature when it comes to sexual matters.’

As mitigating circumstances go this one is thinner than a stick insect’s todger.  Worked like a charm though, didn’t it.

Earlier Nottingham Crown Court heard that such crimes usually result in a four to seven-year prison sentence.

Used to result in a four to seven-year prison sentence.  The precedent this moron of a judge has just set into law has handed paedos of a particular hue a get out of jail free card.  What the Scammel happened to ignorance is no defence?  What happened to justice?  I’ll tell you what’s happened to it.  Our wonderful judiciary just cut off the blind old biddy’s head with that sword of hers and shoved the scales down the hole in her neck!

But the judge said that because Rashid was ‘passive’ and ‘lacking assertiveness’, sending him to jail might cause him ‘more damage than good’.

I guess Rashid dressing up to look like a schoolboy and standing in the dock clasping his hands in front and staring contritely at his feet did the trick, eh?

Rashid, from Birmingham, admitted he had sex with the girl, saying he had been ‘tempted by her’ after they met online.

It was all the girl’s fault.  She wasn’t done up in a tent like a human letterbox so Rashid didn’t have a choice.

Gimme a frigging break!  This is Britain we’re talking about, not some medieval shithole.  We don’t have Sharia courts here.

Oh, wait…

They initially exchanged messages on Facebook before sending texts and chatting on the phone over a two-month period.

They then met up in Nottingham, where Rashid had booked a room at a Premier Inn.

Yeah, he was so naive, passive and lacking assertiveness he had the forethought to pre-book a room in the hotel.

The girl told police they stayed at the hotel for two hours and had sex after Rashid went to the bathroom and emerged wearing a condom.

Wait.  What the…?

Let’s perform a little re-wind.

…you are very naive and immature when it comes to sexual matters.

Not so naive and immature he didn’t know about condoms and what they are for.  Clearly not much of a lily-white ingénue then.  Yet the judge chose to ignore that this paragon of Islamic values went equipped.

I’d say the only naive and immature tosser in the courtroom was Judge Stokes because he’s been had over good and proper.

Rashid then returned home and went straight to a mosque to pray.

Because praying to a Dark Ages warlord who had a nine year old bride is what you do after having sex with a child in a country that locks up paedophiles.  Or at least used to.

He was arrested the following week after the girl confessed what had happened to a school friend, who informed one of her teachers.

It’s a pity the silly girl didn’t confide to her very sensible friend before she met Rashid in the flesh, so to speak.

He told police he knew the girl was 13 but said he was initially reluctant to have sex before relenting after being seduced.

The accused was so reluctant he went to the expense of booking a room and nipping into a chemist for a pack of three. I say chemist since I’m assuming that procuring johnnies from a dispenser in the hotel lavvy is haram.  Or he could have got them from a third party of course.

Earlier the court heard how Rashid had ‘little experience of women’ due to his education at an Islamic school in the UK, which cannot be named for legal reasons.

The name of a school that labels a seven year old a racist for asking another child an innocent question about his skin colour gets splashed all over the papers.  So how come the name of the “school” that teaches its male pupils that women are scum and can be treated as scum gets a pass?  Surely this poison should be weeded out, not protected?

After his arrest, he told a psychologist that he did not know having sex with a 13-year-old was against the law. The court heard he found it was illegal only when he was informed by a family member.

At which point he was so full of remorse for breaking the law he gave himself up to the police.  Oh, wait.  No he didn’t.

In other interviews with psychologists, Rashid claimed he had been taught in his school that ‘women are no more worthy than a lollipop that has been dropped on the ground’.

I’d just love to see the last Ofstead report on this school.  I wonder if it was a glowing, politically correct one?  I can’t wait to see Ofstead explain how rampant Islamic misogyny passed under their radar, accepting, like the judge did, that Rashid isn’t a lying little scrote.  I take it that these Islamic schools are inspected like other faith schools are.  If what Rashid said is true, how many more madrassas in the UK wipe their arses with the national curriculum while under Ofstead’s purview?

When Judge Stokes said Rashid ‘must have known it was illegal, unless he was going round with his eyes shut’, defence lawyer Laban Leake said reports suggested Rashid had a ‘degree of sexual naivety’.

Clearly, Rashid wasn’t the only one going round with his eyes shut…

The school he attended, it is not going too far to say, can be described as a closed community and on this occasion this was perpetuated by his home life.

No shit, Sherlock!  Are we going to see the same largesse handed out to a boy, formerly cloistered in a Catholic school, grooming thirteen year olds and having sex with them?

No?

Then why has Rashid been allowed to get away with it?

‘It is not too far to say that he may not have known that having sex with a 13-year-old girl was illegal.’ Judge Stokes sentenced Rashid to nine months youth custody, suspended for two years, along with a two-year probation supervision order.

But apparently it’s too far to say that Rashid had a mobile phone and a Facebook account which means he had access to the internet.  With all the news about Muslim child grooming gangs and teachers running off abroad with underage pupils being splashed around the media and internet how can he not have known?

Describing Rashid, the judge said: ‘He’s had an unusual education, certainly in terms of the sexual education provided. Comparing women to lollipops is a very curious way of teaching young men about sex.’

Bangs head on table.  It’s not “curious” shit-for-brains, it’s scammelling scandalous!  All those frigging gender equality laws the legal profession print money from vigorously support are being trodden into the mud and all Stokes can say is that it’s curious?  Is he high on crack cocaine or something?  Is he so blinded by political correctness that he can’t see where this will lead?

But he said that Rashid knew what he was doing was wrong.

Then why isn’t Rashid busy avoiding dropping the soap in a prison bathroom?  He groomed and had sex with an underage girl.  That is a prisonable offence.

‘It was made clear to you at the school you attended that having sexual relations with a woman before marriage was contrary to the precepts of Islam,’ he said.

So Rashid is being given this outrageously lenient sentenced for ignoring madrassa teaching?

Addressing Rashid, the judge said: ‘I accept this was a case where the girl was quite willing to have sexual activity with you. But the law is there to protect young girls, even though they are perfectly happy to engage in sexual activity.’

Unless some dhimmified Judge is willing to make an exception when it suits him?

The law my left buttock!  British law has become a travesty, a joke, a sham.  It is unfit for purpose.  Judge Stokes should hang up his wig and gown in shame. Letting a paedophile go because he went to the wrong school is an unacceptable defence. and the sentence handed down has no place in any civilised society.

Crime of the Century…

Well, it’s been bitter cold a few days ago. I know I was varnishing an external door.

I then thought for dinner I might fancy (It was my wife’s idea) making a hearty Spanish style stew. So I went on a hunt for chorizo… and found it at the Co-op which staggered me for it was the only “filthy foreign sausages” (insert Sid James line of choice) the Co-op did have among it’s bewildering variety of almost identical British (Gawd bless ‘er! etc.) mechanically recovered offal tubes (there’s a ref there and not a prize if you get it – well not from me, anyway) there was chorizo! My flabber was gasted. None of that other continental filth, mind. None of your French or German or Czech or Polish or whatever sausage (insert Sid James line of choice). Apart from their many other sins the Co-op is staggeringly parochial. On the little screens at the tills there’s loads of piccies of “jolly natives” with their new water-pump but (with the exception of chorizo) nothing else paid for by buying Fairtrade tat or buying bottles of “ethical water” (why does that always remind me of homeopathy?)

And, yes, I am aware the British sausage industry (insert Sid James line of choice) makes lovely sausages too but those were not represented. Just umpty varieties of bog-standard “bangers”* of the sort I only ate as a student and only when I was on my uppers. Fortunately not too often. Anyway I got chatting to J who works there and is by far and away the most competent member of staff. He used to be a pub land-lord but… Well, I dunno – what with pubs closing 16 to the dozen and all – but he’s a shelf-stacker now. He’ll never make management because I suspect he is regarded as “not a team player” which is HR talk for, “shows initiative and is capable of thinking independently”. The way to get ahead in such organisations (I saw much the same when temping for the Government) is to just keep your head down and schmooze. Never, ever suggest a better way of doing things it shows your line-manager up. I did once and was “pruned”.

Anyway he told me a story… He’d recently apprehended a shop-lifter. The shop-lifter had gone over to the freezers and purloined a tub of Ben & Jerry’s ice-cream and had concealed it down the front of his trousers**.

“Is that stolen goods in your pants or are you just pleased to see me?”

J told me something else bizarre too. Apparently ice-cream sales rocket in the last half of December. I found that odd considering what I was making for dinner that night.

*Insert Sid James line of choice. etc. This is getting tired, so I’m retiring it.
**Oh, go on, that is very “Carry On”. On pretty much the coldest day of the year he had put a tub of ice-cream next to his genitals. Perhaps he was planning on wooing a lady? Well, I guess the poor mare would have been disappointed as the Barry White was playing and the lights went low. Unless he’d previous half-inched a magnifying glass and tweezers. Some how I doubt he had the fore-sight. He might have had a cryogenic foreskin mind :-)

Jimmy Saville Joke.

I bet Gary Glitter regrets not asking Jim to fix it instead of taking his computer to PC World.

That is a terrible joke, via Sickipedia.

But there is a sub-plot. I fix computers. I don’t care what is on the HD(s). If there is obvious criminality there then expect a call from the dibble. If not I don’t care. It’s like a confessional but more like a doctor. I frankly don’t give a damn about your Frankie Vaughn or whatever. I’ve seen it all by now. What interests me, what interests the client is getting it to work. That is all. I love machines and what you do with them is your look-out, not mine.

By the way I wouldn’t take a pair of counting sticks to PC World. If you are in the North West of England speak to me or see the folks at Aria Tech.

Judicial Fuckwit of the Week…

Well in view of some of our current posts, and baring in mind that our good friend Julia M would fisk it better, I am sufficiently outraged by this highly paid dripping Wet moron, to have ago myself…

“He told Teesside Crown Court yesterday: ‘It takes a huge amount of courage as far as I can see for somebody to burgle somebody’s house. I wouldn’t have the nerve.”

No your Honour, you wouldn’t,but if you did you wouldn’t have a job either would you? In fact I seriously wonder if you are fit for the one you hold now. Pleas of Mitigation should be left to the Defence Council, don’t you think? however fatuous, not the fuckin Judge!

Courage? what in the current climate? you’re havin a Giraffe! It’s a walk in the Park my old Judicial nonce. If the situation that pertains in America, as has been well investigated in SAOT’s earlier post, existed here, then it would be an act of courage ( blind stupidity more like. “Do I love other people’s stuff more than my life? Doh!). But as most burglary in the UK is an opportunist crime carried out solo and reliant on the householder’s own laxity over security, and usually carries years worth of criminality and getting away with it behind, and when they eventually get caught cough up for a string of TIC’s often into triple figures, then “Courage” is hardly the appropriate word for it, is it your Fuckwittedness?

‘Yet somehow, bolstered by drugs and desperation, you were prepared to do that,’ he told Rochford, 26.”

Get off the bench and over to the Dock and High Five the fucker why doncha?!!

He also said Rochford had been damaged by prison and added: ‘I think prison very rarely does anybody any good. It mostly leaves people the chance to change their own mind if they want to.

‘I don’t think anybody would benefit from sending you to prison today. We’d all just feel a bit easier that a burglar had been taken off the streets.’

Yes Judge, we would all feel better if a burglar, especially such a prolific one, had been taken off the streets. I think, if you look in the small print… That is your fuckin Job!

Rochford burgled three homes in East Cleveland and tried to burgle another in the space of five days.

Serial burglar Richard Rochford

Court: Richard Rochford was facing a term of two-and-a-half years when the judge decided against custody

He took a laptop, a satnav, money and car keys along with jewellery and a handbag amongst other items.

Judge Bowers said he deserved to be jailed for two-and-a-half years, and anything less would not satisfy the public.

Yep Judge, that’s what we poor victims of others “misfortunes” damn well expect alright!

“Judge Bowers acknowledged that the victims would have suffered as a result of the crimes, adding: ‘For months and months and sometimes years, they never recover.’

That’s right Judge, some of them never recover. Many victims of Burglary have to move home because their personal space has been so sullied that they feel it is akin to Rape. They feel that they have been soiled and never ever feel secure again in what they are entitled to believe is their sovereign territory, which they may have lived in all their lives.

Arse shiners and rose tinted gazers like you, and too many others on the Bench of our Crown Courts, think that a burglary is just about “stuff”. Stuff that can be replaced on the Insurance. No harm done, except for the inconvenience. No big deal. Well it is a big deal you asshole!

This amoral little twat will be up before you very soon your dimwittedness, mark my words, or perhaps one of your colleagues, who will be just as forgiving with other peoples emotions, property , security, self respect and well-being.

How do we get to fire fuckwits like you?

%d bloggers like this: