Sunday, August 21, 2011

Our Court System working well.

See that my good friend, Lord Carlile of Berriew has been telling the BBC that he thinks the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats are going to 'fall-out' over the sentencing of rioters. I do not think this will be the case - at least not to any meaningful extent. I do agree there may be differences in rhetoric, but I would expect the MPs of both parties to accept that politicians should not interfere with the courts.

Despite this non-interference approach, there is absolutely no reason why politicians should not have an opinion. It would be very odd if politicians did not have an opinion on a matter of such importance. I also believe that all MPs accept, as Lord Carlile seems to that "There is absolutely no doubt that the riot situation calls for severer sentences". There is a difference between stealing something, and 'looting' as part of a riot, even when the act, in isolation, is the same. Our magistrates and judges know this, and will sentence accordingly - which is why we've been seeing some harsh punishments handed down. No doubt some of these will be reduced on appeal. Nothing wrong with that, because the appeal system is part of the judicial process. Must add that I have been hugely impressed by how the court system has risen to the challenge of dealing with so many criminals at the same time.

3 comments:

bonetired said...

What people must realise is that the sentences given are not dictated by the government but by the judiciary. The government might support the longer punishments but cannot influence individual punishments which are given in accordance within the sentencing guidelines. Looting within a riot will be given within a harsher punishment that "simple" theft. As for those people who fired pistols in Birmingham ....

Anonymous said...

you take a correct attitude. they deserve whatever the courts throw at them

Glyn Davies said...

Bonetired - agreed. It seems obvious to me, which is why I do not think thee is that much scope for the coalition partners to disagree. More scope for disagreement on policies to support marriage, and cut benefit payments.