Mens Tennis Forums banner

The English riots: the personal cost

4K views 61 replies 20 participants last post by  abraxas21 
#1 ·
Amelia Gentleman speaks to youngsters for whom a few heady days in August have cast a long shadow

Last week, Danielle Corns was sentenced to 10 months in prison for momentarily stealing two left-footed trainers during riots in Wolverhampton. As she was sentenced, her mum Sharon began shouting at the judge from the public gallery: "You're destroying an innocent girl's life… How can you do that to somebody?" As she screamed, her daughter began to cry, and Sharon was swiftly made to leave the courtroom by security staff.

That evening, as she waited to find out which prison Danielle had been sent to, Sharon said she thought her daughter would not cope well with being in jail. "It's a damaging experience. She'll never be able to erase it from her mind. She shouldn't have to experience that. She's not a criminal. It's very unfair, the way she's been treated. It's just so wrong."

Now that we're deep into November, the heat and chaos of midsummer feels a distant memory, but for the families of young people caught up in the riots, the events of a few anarchic August days have cast long shadows.

For those who have never been in trouble with the police before, and who appear to have had only the most fleeting involvement, the severity of the treatment they have received has come as a shock. Time spent in the courtrooms, where judges are still only beginning to wade through the fallout from these events, reveals how many lives have been ruined in an instant by the simple decision to venture out, to look at what was happening in the streets. Time spent with relatives shows how one person's arrest can have devastating implications for the rest of the family.

Judges and magistrates justify the unusually stiff penalties they are still giving to those found guilty of riots-related offences by citing their right to impose stricter sentences as a deterrent. It was in this climate that two young men who set up a Facebook page encouraging a riot (which they never attended and which never actually took place) were sentenced to four years in prison, and that a young mother of two – who herself slept through the riots – was sentenced to five months for accepting a pair of shorts, looted by a friend (although she was later freed on appeal).

Immediately after the riots, the political signals were very clear. David Cameron said it was important that judges sent out a "tough message". Lord Chief Justice Lord Judge defended some of the most severe decisions, remarking, "Given the overall ghastliness of what was going on in the country, these sentences had to be significantly higher." Judges concluded that the sentences should reflect the mood of public indignation.

For people such as Danielle Corns, this has led to peculiar judgments; it's hard to see what's happening to her as anything other than a pointless waste of her time and taxpayers' money....

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/nov/25/england-riots-personal-cost-youngsters-sentenced
what a sham. the rich have been screwing the poor classes for centuries and one harmless teenage girl robs a pair of shoes and gets 10 months in prison. the rich and the politicians are doing everything in their power to protect their system
 
#5 ·
I think it's great she got sentenced to be fair.
:facepalm: i always thought you were a bit of a clown. i just wasnt sure why

Just the problem here is why should one girl be sentenced while thousands of others are simply left free?
read the whole article. it's not just her case, it's the way the english courts have dealt with all of the people who have been involved or were involved in the riots.
 
#7 ·
Well we can't confirm she was harmless, for one thing we don't know her and she had the guts to wade through the melee and craziness and 'jack' two left footed trainers. The stupidity of the crime aside, the punishment doesn't fit the crime, that part is obviously true. Most of the rioters/looters aren't exactly criminals as such, she clearly got herself involved with the crowd mentality.

She deserves a greater punishment than what she would normally get for the crime, but not 10 months. Extended community service would have sufficed, save the 10 months for the far greater crimes. They'll probably end up shortening the sentence.

Everything from the policing of the rioters to the sentencing has been a shambles, but it's the same with everything English authorities aren't used to dealing with.
 
#9 ·
She should be sentenced and receive punishment for her wrong-doing, although 10 months sounds way too harsh for a pair wrong-footed trainers.

I think the system is giving her a punishment for all the other people that were not caught which I think is wrong. One thing this harsh punishment might accomplish though is that it will deter people from stealing and they'll think twice before looting.
 
#10 ·
Could just give her a 10 month course on how to properly steal footwear.
 
#11 ·
what a sham. the rich have been screwing the poor classes for centuries
It must be somewhat nice to have such a limited conceptual apparatus through which you understand and interpret current events. Makes thinking easier.

One imagines that you would offer the same "analysis" about a story in which a McDonald's patron is shorted her fries, or in which a monkey escapes from the zoo, etc.

Could just give her a 10 month course on how to properly steal footwear.
:lol:
 
#12 ·
It must be somewhat nice to have such a limited conceptual apparatus through which you understand and interpret current events. Makes thinking easier.

One imagines that you would offer the same "analysis" about a story in which a McDonald's patron is shorted her fries, or in which a monkey escapes from the zoo, etc.



:lol:
i understand that it must quite annoying for you that i'm able to make good points in concize sentences -aphorisms, if you will- whereas you need at least 5 pages of careful dedication to write down the same old tired BS that many others have expressed with more eloquence and sense than you :wavey:
 
#15 ·
A few days ago you were berating me for commenting on a Canadian case where an Afghan man and his son drowned the three girls in the family along with his other wife. (The girls liked nice clothes and talked to boys at school.) You said the press should not report this stuff, for some reason that escapes me other than that you must favour press censorship, so we would all end up reading Granma.

Given that English justice sets the standard for the world, I would think you would favour ignoring this small anomaly in favour of concentrating on the big picture.

Apart from that, if I were to clutter the forum by starting a thread over every little thing I found worthy of criticism in the non-Western world, I would rightly be called a huge mug clown. Why don't you stick to important stuff, like dwarf tossing?
 
#21 ·
A few days ago you were berating me for commenting on a Canadian case where an Afghan man and his son drowned the three girls in the family along with his other wife. (The girls liked nice clothes and talked to boys at school.) You said the press should not report this stuff, for some reason that escapes me other than that you must favour press censorship, so we would all end up reading Granma.
no, that's not the case and i explained my reasons in detail in that thread but that's another business. now onto the following:

Given that English justice sets the standard for the world,
if i were to replies with smilies, i'm not sure if my answer should be a :rolleyes: or simply a :lol:

what do you think?

I would think you would favour ignoring this small anomaly in favour of concentrating on the big picture.
like i said to certinfy: read the whole article. it's not just her case, it's the way the english courts have dealt with all of the people who have been involved or were involved in the riots.

so you see, this is about the big picture.

Apart from that, if I were to clutter the forum by starting a thread over every little thing I found worthy of criticism in the non-Western world, I would rightly be called a huge mug clown. Why don't you stick to important stuff, like dwarf tossing?
hahaha... in spite of your lack of an adequate political judgement, at least you still have some humour.
 
#26 ·
Theft is theft. Whether it's someone stealing a few tomatoes from the local vegemarket or someone stealing half a dozen iPhone 4's from Dick Smith. Doesn't make it right. Just because the person who stole "less", but happened to get caught, doesn't mean we should stop punishing thieves.

Also, will you ever stop bitching? The rich are rich because they got off their ass and worked. I accept that I will never be rich because I am content to sit on my ass, recieve average salary and half ass my way through life and I accept it. People like you are self entitled and think "the rich are bringing them down" because you are a lazy piece of crap. Stop blaming everyone else and look at yourself.
 
#30 ·
1. Theft is, of course, theft. However, the law differentiates the penalty for theft based on the amount stolen — at least that is the case in the United States and probably in most countries. The law recognizes that the theft of a tomato is a much lesser harm than is the theft of several thousand dollars . There is misdemeanor theft and felony theft. I think nearly everyone, excepting you evidently, recognizes that the punishment for Bernie Madoff should be greater than for someone stealing a tomato even if “theft is theft.

2. Rich people are usually rich because they inherited wealth from their relatives. That is the most usual way people have acquired wealth. There are some rich people who have worked themselves up from nothing, but they are the minority of wealthy people. There are, of course, others like Mitt Romney and Donald Trump who inherited wealth and then increased their wealth through their own efforts. Let us not delude ourselves that wealthy people have all worked hard for their wealth.

In reality, hard work does not lead to wealth. Many working class people work longer hours and at body crushing labor and never become rich or are even able to get medical insurance. And here I am only talking about western economies. I’m not talking about the millions and millions who toil from dawn to dusk to merely stave off starvation.

So please don’t even entertain the thought that people who do not have money are lazy. You have no idea what people go through to merely maintain their families at malnourished levels.
 
#28 ·
That's why they have elections.

But there is an argument against what you say anyway. Taxes paid to governments do not make wealth as much as jobs in private business does. If you go to the extreme of where Castro paid everybody $15/month and held back the rest in taxes, the result did not help the economy, it ruined it.
 
#37 ·
this thread has made my day btw

seingeist, buddyholly and topspindctor --a fundamentalist Christian, a northern irish right-wing loyalist and a xenophobic bogan-- all uniting their forces in their political clowning. mother england would be proud
 
#48 ·
Either they themselves worked hard or someone in their family :shrug:. You're saying Bill Gates, Steve Jobs or Mark Zuckerberg didn't work hard?

Fact is, success is based on hard work, there are a lot of studies about it... Businessmen hone their craft as well.

It's time people stop being jealous and start being productive.
 
#60 ·
not really my conclusion

but the western economic model is kind of a vague term. for starters, i'd much prefer iceland over england or canada over the USA. i'm not really anti western as many times you and others have labeled me. i simply advocate for democracy (the truly inclusive and participative one), respect for human rights, respect of other countries' internal affairs, social assistance to those in need and freedom. then again, this wasn't about me...
 
#61 ·
i simply advocate for democracy (the truly inclusive and participative one), respect for human rights, respect of other countries' internal affairs, social assistance to those in need and freedom. then again, this wasn't about me...
Sounds like Canada to me.

You can't really compare Iceland to the USA or England. It is a very small country and does not have the problems of larger more open countries.
When you talk of social assistance to those in need and freedom, what does Iceland do for foreign aid? What does Iceland do to help people from oppressed countries in the way of immigration? It is Canada and the US that lead the world in that respect.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top