A True Deterrent Would Include Deportation

A former PhD student has been sentenced to four and a half years in prison for arranging to send a young girl to Iraq for female genital mutilation (FGM), in the first conviction of its kind in England and Wales. Emad Kaky, 47, was found guilty of conspiring to commit FGM last month, the first time a person had been convicted of a conspiracy charge in relation to FGM.

Strangely, we aren't told what his relationship to the victim was, or how he seemingly had custody of the child in order to do it. No doubt to protect her identity, but there's a mother involved somewhere here, surely... 

A two-week trial at Nottingham crown court heard how Kaky had arranged for a child to travel from the UK to Iraq where he had organised for her to be subjected to FGM and forced into marriage. Emad Kaky described FGM as ‘normal’ in messages found on his phone. The plans were uncovered, before the crimes could be carried out, by a witness who arranged for the girl to travel back to the UK and reported Kaky to the police.

A foreign custom, planned to be carried out by a foreigner in a foreign land, caught by good old British justice? 

Sentencing Kaky, Judge Nirmal Shant KC said his plans were barbaric. “You made concerted efforts to make sure this happened. I make, nonetheless, some adjustment for the fact that no FGM took place, and importantly, thankfully, [the girl] was unaware of any of these plans,” she said.

“This offence calls for a deterrent sentence. What you did, what you had planned, was barbaric.”

Not that much of a deterrant, is it? Four and a half years being sheltered and fed at the taxpayer's expense? 

Janine McKinney, chief crown prosecutor for CPS East Midlands, said: “This has been a landmark prosecution, not just because it is the first conviction of its kind, but for the message it sends to people who may be vulnerable to this horrific form of abuse.”

It'd be a far stronger message if he was kicked out of the country at the end of it. 

The defence barrister Geraldine Kelly told the court Kaky’s academic accomplishments as a PhD student at the University of Nottingham were “respected” and “impressive”, and that losing his job was “in itself a form of punishment”.

No sweetie, those are consequences. Why in a case with three women involved - judge, prosecutor and defence - is the outcome so bloody weak? 

Even Their Briefs Are Bonkers!

The barrister Paul Powlesland, who has acted for climate protesters, was called to jury service last week, and made judicial history by taking an oath on the thing most holy to him – not an ancient book, but a cupful of water from his local river in north-east London:

“I swear by the River Roding, from her source in Molehill Green to her confluence with the Thames,” he said, “that I will faithfully try the defendant and give a true verdict according to the evidence.”

*blinks* 

Powlesland explained that he wanted to promote the idea of the sacredness of nature, and its place in the legal system. “I hope that many others follow suit,” he said, “and animism is soon found more regularly in our courts.”

Well, you do you, Paul. I'll be hoping for more sanity in them myself. 

"We cannot get justice without CCTV"

The mother of a young boy with complex needs has called for all special schools to have CCTV after her son was attacked by a teaching assistant. Her 13-year-old son Tobie, from Wolverhampton, is autistic and non-speaking. He was kicked, pushed and had his head held down in the 20 minute assault, and his mother Charlotte said a security camera had picked up the full extent of the attack. "To see that man attack him in a place he thought was safe - it was just horrendous," Charlotte said.

Unfortunately, even with the CCTV, she didn't get justice.... 

Tobie's attacker, William Kevin Clifford, 61, pleaded guilty to child cruelty at Wolverhampton Crown Court earlier this month and was given a suspended sentence of nine months.

*sighs* You won't believe why....

Passing sentencing, the judge told the court: 'William Kevin Clifford has several mitigating factors and a huge amount of suffering whilst waiting for this case to be concluded, including anxiety, weight gain and the inability to secure any employment.'

He's the real victim here, you see...anyone else would simply say those thing were consequences of his actions, not any sort of mitigation. 

"If that security camera had not picked it up, then we would never have known what had happened Tobie,' Charlotte said. "If this could happen in Tobie's school, with a formidable team of staff, it can happen anywhere."

And while the 'pinishment' for it is barely even a slap on the wrist, why would it ever stop happening?  

Currently, it is down to the individual school to decide whether it wants CCTV. Campaigners in the past have taken a petition to the Scottish Parliament but their call to make surveillance mandatory was rejected over concerns about the balance between privacy and protection.

Or more likely, concerns about how widespread this behaviour is?  

Convict In Haste...

...retrial at leisure? 

Former Cabinet Minister David Davis is to spearhead a Commons campaign raising questions about the conviction of nurse Lucy Letby as growing numbers of experts express concerns about the case. The ex-Brexit Secretary plans to table a series of questions under Parliamentary privilege amid disquiet within the NHS and the legal profession about the case.

Mail columnists Peter Hitchens and Nadine Dorries have highlighted that Letby was convicted of the murders of seven newborns and the attempted murders of six other infants at the Countess of Chester Hospital, despite the fact that no one saw her kill, or attempt to kill, a baby and there is no forensic evidence to prove her guilt.

One of your other columnists disagrees, though (paywalled).   

Some members of the Royal Statistical Society have expressed concerns over the use of statistics to secure a conviction on the basis of probabilities. Its recommendations on using such data in the cases of medical serial killers were not followed here.

Recommendations are just that. They don't have to be followed. 

But why would the state and all its operatives conspire to convict a woman of such a heinous crime?

Mr Davis is understood to be concerned about the justice system's institutional reluctance to admit to its own failings, leading innocent people to languish in prison. He said: 'There is a mounting consensus among experts that Lucy Letby's guilt was not established beyond reasonable doubt. I will be using Parliamentary privilege to raise these arguments: we must exclude the possibility that she has effectively been scapegoated for the wider failings in the system.'

Ah! Some might call that 'motive' 

'At the very least, this appears to be a mistrial. But the justice system moves slowly when it comes to assessing its own failings, so if she is innocent it could be a decade before she is released. We must try to do much better than that.'

Regular readers will know I don't automatically disbelieve claims of miscarrtiage of justice - in fact there are at least two glaring examples where I believe the convictions to be unsafe. But I'm not convinced this is one to add.    

"...poor policing, weak prosecution, dereliction of duty in medical care and a series of catastrophic missed opportunities ..."

The families of the victims of the Nottingham attacks have vowed to take their fight for accountability “to the next level” on the one-year anniversary of the killings. In a joint statement, the families of Grace O’Malley-Kumar, Barnaby Webber and Ian Coates, who were killed by Valdo Calocane in the early hours of 13 June last year, said they had instructed a legal team to help them “leave no stone unturned on our quest for answers”.

And so they should - who wouldn't wish them every success?  

Calocane was given a hospital order after pleading guilty to three counts of manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility owing to paranoid schizophrenia, as well as three counts of attempted murder. In May, the court of appeal rejected an application to increase his sentence to include jail time, with the lady chief justice, Sue Carr, saying “schizophrenia was the sole identified cause of these crimes”.

Solely identified as such by those who wanted to hide the fact they were accomplices. 

The families said the outcome “was disappointing but not unexpected”, and blamed it on an “utterly flawed and under-resourced criminal justice system”.They said it was “because of a weak investigation and prosecution, over-reliance upon doctors’ evidence and archaic out-of-date laws that Calocane receives no punishment for his heinous acts. “We recognise his previous diagnosis of mental illness, however, maintain that he knew what he was doing, he knew it was wrong, but he did it anyway. And therefore, he is a murderer,” they said.

Indeed he is. And if they don't win this, he won't be the only one let out to kill again...  

'No Risk To The Public' Who Aren't At A Bus Stop?

Joyce Bacon, 60, and Adele Boylin, 55, both mothers, were standing waiting to board the bus in Piccadilly Gardens when they were hit by a double decker Stagecoach being driven by 35-year-old Baruania Baros. Baros, a bus driver with four years experience with a clean driving licence, was helping a disabled passenger leave the bus when he accidentally pressed the accelerator instead of the brake pedal.

Baros, from Ashton-under-Lyne, pleaded guilty to two counts of causing death by careless driving, and was given a suspended prison sentence. The judge said his pregnant wife would be harmed if Baros was locked up and ruled that he did not pose a 'risk or danger' to the public.

We've been here before, so the leniency should probably be expected.

An expert found that Baros had left the bus in gear, rather than in neutral as it should have been. If it had been left in neutral, the accident would have been avoided, the court heard.

And yet despite clear evidence of incompetence, the (female!) judge has more sympathy for the perpetrator than the two victims.  

'This was a fatal mistake on your part,' Judge Suzanne Goddard KC told Baros, describing the incident as a 'tragic accident'.

I wonder why? Does she have a soft spot for public transport workers?  

The court heard that Baros and his family arrived in the UK as part of a refugee program, after spending time detained in a refugee camp in Tanzania.

Ah. Now I see. What are two dead Englishwomen set against your desire to stroke your progressive conscience, eh, Susie?  

Sentencing, Judge Goddard told Baros: 'In my judgement you do not present a risk or danger to the public. You have a good record, an absence of previous convictions and you have shown remorse. 'Here there is a realistic prospect of rehabilitation, strong personal mitigation, and immediate custody will result in significant harmful impact upon others.'

Have all our judiciary forgotten that prison is supposed to be a punishment as well?  

These Rules Need To Change

Kenner a self employed tiler was initially charged with intent to cause grievous bodily harm in August 2021 which fetches a maximum of life imprisonment but after five separate court adjournments for undisclosed reasons prosecutors eventually accepted his guilty plea in September 2023 to the lesser charge of assault causing actual bodily harm.

Yet again, the useless CPS proves themselve too lazy to do the real work. 

They then recommended he faced a maximum of only two and a half years behind bars under sentencing guidelines before a further three hearings came and went whilst Kenner tried unsuccessfully to withdraw his guilty plea.

All paid for by the long suffering taxpayers, of course!  

This week, 31 months since the assault, Kenner who arrived 20 minutes late for his hearing at Bolton Crown Court was ordered to complete 150 hours unpaid work and was sent on a 'Building Better relationships' programme after a powerless judge said he had 'very little option' but to let him go free.

I don't blame the judge, he's probably right. 

The court heard he had already spent 11 months on remand before being bailed on a curfew to await trial and as a result under Home Office rules had already served the equivalent of a 23 month prison sentence.

This rule has to go - surely it would be a quick win for a Conservative Home Sec (if we actually had one)? 

If we are always told that people on remand are 'innocent until proven guilty' then why should their time on remand be counted as part of their sentence? That should only start when they are found guilty!   

We Didn't See You As 'Trusted Messengers' Before Your Virtue Signalling Nonsense...

...so we aren't likely to do it after this:

Dr Sarah Benn has long been concerned about the climate crisis, diligently recycling until she was “blue in the face”. But the rise of the climate activist group Extinction Rebellion in 2019 inspired her and her husband to go further. “We thought: well, if we don’t do it then who else is going to?” While working as a GP near Birmingham, Benn became increasingly involved in direct action over the next few years, and once glued her hand to the door of the Department for Business, Energy, and Industrial Strategy in protest at the government’s inaction on the climate.

*sighs* If only they spent as much time seeing patients as they do virtue signalling, we'd respect them more... 

Benn now faces a professional tribunal by the Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service (MPTS), the disciplinary arm of the General Medical Council (GMC), to determine whether she can keep her licence to practise. She is one of three GPs who face being struck off for climate activism this year, and her case in April is the first that will be heard.

After her first four criminal convictions – two for obstructing a highway, one for stopping people engaged in a lawful activity and one for flying a drone in a restricted place – the GMC opened an investigation.

Yes, Reader, you read that right - it takes FOUR convictions to get them to come in off the golf course and take a good hard look... 

It was not until Benn was found guilty of contempt of court for breaching a civil injunction at Kingsbury oil terminal in Warwickshire as part of a Just Stop Oil campaign that she was referred for a full tribunal. Benn spent a total of 31 days in prison for this action.

And she's far from the only one: 

Dr Patrick Hart, a GP from Bristol, also has a string of convictions for climate activism, one of which resulted in a suspended prison sentence. After he rejected a formal warning from the GMC, he was told he would face a tribunal in November.

“The lawyer I spoke to said it was unusually lenient but I didn’t take it. Partly because it would have been dishonest and partly because I’m angry with them for … failing to make any meaningful statement about any of this and enthusiastically investigating people for matters of conscience and patient care,” Hart said.

Where's the 'patient care' in all this grandstanding? 

Benn has now retired and is no longer practising as a GP. But she wants the GMC to recognise the importance of her actions, and said doctors should be seen as “trusted messengers”.

Not happening.  

The Feminisation Of The Justice System...

The US district judge Colleen McMahon on Friday granted James Cromitie, 58, compassionate release from prison six months after she ordered the release of his three co-defendants, known as the Newburgh Four, for similar reasons. The four men from the small river city 60 miles north of New York City were convicted of terrorism charges in 2010.

Yes, it seems that these men - all the usual suspects, of course - wouldn't have dreamed of being terrorists if some undercover agents hadn't said 'Hey, buddy, fancy doing a bit of terrorism?'...

And we aren't talking about small acts here, either: 

Prosecutors in the high-profile case said the Newburgh defendants had spent months scouting targets and securing what they thought were explosives and a surface-to-air missile, aiming to shoot down planes at the air national guard base in Newburgh and blow up synagogues in the Bronx. They were arrested after allegedly planting “bombs” that were packed with inert explosives supplied by the FBI.

But for Colleen, that's apparently not enough to mark them out as terrorists. 

Cromitie was bought into the phony plot by the federal informant Shaheed Hussain, whose work has been criticized for years by civil liberties groups. McMahon called him “most unsavory” and a “villain” sent by the government to “troll among the poorest and weakest of men for ‘terrorists’ who might prove susceptible to an offer of much-needed cash in exchange for committing a faux crime”.

Yes, their only 'crime' is to be susceptible to incitement to terrorism. Apart from that, they are just normal American citizens... if you believe that, I've got a bridge to sell you, Colleen!

Lawrence, Cromitie’s attorney, said on Saturday he had not yet been able to reach his client, but that Cromitie’s family was very happy. “I’m obviously thrilled that Mr Cromitie will be released from prison, but still believe that his conviction was entirely the product of government entrapment,” Lawrence wrote in an email.

You know how he could have avoided that conviction? He could have said 'No, sorry, I'm not a terrorist' when the government agents came looking for a patsy. 

Passing A Law Is Only The Start...

Under Clare’s law – named after Clare Wood, 36, who was murdered in 2009 by her ex-boyfriend George Appleton – people have a right to ask police whether a partner or ex-partner has a history of abusive behaviour. Public bodies can also apply to warn people who may be in danger.

Hurrah! Job done, everyone off to the pub to celebrate! 

But an analysis of official data has found dramatic variations in the implementation of Clare’s law, which is officially known as the domestic violence disclosure scheme, with some forces supplying information in up to 75% of cases, while others reject almost all requests.

Ah. Maybe not. 

Experts said there were multiple reasons why police forces could have drastically different disclosure rates, including that some did not prioritise Clare’s law requests, took different approaches to perpetrators’ privacy rights, or applied different standards when assessing whether applications met the threshold.

*sighs* Back to the drawing board... 

Headlines For Our Times...

Melissa Mathieson was strangled by Jason Conroy at Alexandra House, which provides residential care for adults with autism and Asperger's syndrome, in Bristol in 2014.

Yes, Reader, that's right. Nine years ago... 

Conroy, now aged 27, was jailed for life and ordered to serve a minimum term of 19 years for the killing. Bristol Crown Court heard that Alexandra Homes (Bristol) Ltd was charged with an offence under the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 last year following a lengthy investigation.

They aren't kidding with that 'lengthy'... 

Hours before her death, Miss Mathieson had complained to staff that Conroy was stalking her. Mr Sapiecha told the court that the company had failed in its duty to keep residents safe after being given information about the danger Conroy posed, including a report from psychiatrist Dr Hilary Grant. 'It cannot be said there was no warning at all,' he said.

In almost all of these cases, that's the case. There's plenty of warning, it hardly ever comes out of the blue. And yet, these supposed 'professionals' fail time after time.  

Andrew Langdon KC, defending, said the company had been trading for nearly 20 years and had an enviable reputation in the industry.

Yes, the key there is 'had'. 

A Court Case For The Times...

Sadly, the times we are living in. And they are pretty horrific.

The alleged perpetrators, feral and with seemingly no parenting to speak of:

Her alleged killers – a boy and girl both aged 15 at the time – were 'preoccupied with violence, torture and death' and had swapped messages discussing how they wanted to kill people they knew, Manchester Crown Court heard. 

Girl X told Boy Y that after they met up, the plan was to 'grab onto Brianna slit her throat when she starts to fall stab her in the back then pass me knife'. She added: 'I want to stab her at least once even if she's dead jus coz it's fun lol.' 

Jurors were told that since being held in a secure unit, Girl X had been found to have 'traits of autism and ADHD' and showed 'high levels of anxiety'. Boy X had been diagnosed with autism, they were told, along with a 'high level of social anxiety'.

The justice system, concerned less with the victim than the welfare of the defendants:

... the trial is being conducted with 'more informality' than normal, the trial judge, Mrs Justice Yip, told them, with both accused being helped to follow proceedings by 'intermediaries'.

The victim, narcissistic and damaged by gender nonsense:

...Brianna was living as a young woman at the time of her death but was born a boy with the name Brett Spooner. 

On the eve of what would have been Brianna’s 17th birthday, her mum, Esther Ghey, spoke to ITV News and said she feels like there's a "hole" in her heart but is bittersweet as people are celebrating her daughter's life as "Brianna would've wanted that.” 

The student had dreams of becoming TikTok famous, having racked up an impressive 31,000 followers on the social media platform with her videos.

What to say? Those who decry the concept of  'broken Britain' should take a good hard look at this case and reconsider. 

I Thought We'd Abolished Shame, Judge..?

A former police chief who retired while under investigation for possessing indecent images of children was spared jail on Monday after a judge said the 'shame' of admitting his crimes was the greatest punishment he could receive.

Pretty sure the guidelines allowed for something far, far more appropriate... 

On Monday, the 55-year-old stood grim-faced in the dock at Manchester Crown Court as his barrister described his 'humiliation' at how his 30-year policing career had been ended by what his bosses branded the 'abhorrent' crimes.

But a judge accepted there was no evidence that Sansbury had been deliberately looking for images of children after hearing he had been searching for 'twinks' – pornographic pictures of adolescent-looking men.

Oh, well, that's OK then. He'd probably have got a promotion for that if he'd told his management... 

Imposing a community order with 80 hours of unpaid work, Judge Nicholas Dean KC, the Honorary Recorder of Manchester, told Sansbury he had 'served, no doubt with some distinction, as a senior police officer'.

The judge said the reasons why Sansbury saved the images was 'not now clear', but accepted he was not someone who 'consistently' sought illicit photos.

'The loss of your good character and the shame of your departure from the police force in these circumstances is plainly a significant punishment,' he added.

I don't concur. 

Where's The Justice Here?

Sickening footage shows the moment a surly teenager killed an 82-year-old Army veteran with a single punch after being told off for causing trouble in a Derby bus station.

Omar Moumeche, who was 16 at the time, violently attacked beloved Dennis Clarke at Derby bus station after he told off his friends for messing about on an escalator.

That's a good old Derby name, isn't it? 

Moumeche, now 18, was found guilty of manslaughter in July and was sentenced to two years in youth detention at Derby Crown Court today.

*sighs* 

Detective Inspector Mark Shaw said: 'Our investigation was assisted by the capture of CCTV footage and many witness accounts, all of which were presented during the trial. 'The defendant claimed he acted in self-defence, and the jury on the balance and high threshold required refused to accept his version of events.'

Yeah, it was a pretty open and shut case but I wouldn't congratulate yourself too much, if I were you:

No further action was taken against two other teenage boys who were arrested at the time in connection with the attack.

Why not? They acted in concert, after all. They should be facing the very same (utterly pathetic) consequences, shouldn't they? 

Bending The Language To Breaking Point...

A former Metropolitan Police officer has been found guilty of sending an offensive racist message following a BBC Newsnight investigation.The court heard that he shared an image in the WhatsApp group in September 2022 that the prosecution described as "grossly offensive".

Was it? Reader, you decide:  

The image showed parrots of different colours and children of different ethnicities. It read: "Why do we cherish the variety of colour in every species except our own?"

And underneath, said: "Because I've never had a bike stolen out of my front yard by a parrot."

Chadwell then sent the message "oops, not too woke", the court heard.

It's not only funny, it's accurate! 

On finding Chadwell guilty, deputy magistrate Tanweer Ikram told the court: "He thought it was funny, but it was grossly offensive, and he was aware of it at the time."

*shakes head sadly* How did we come to this?

’As a result, a member of staff at the children’s home has been suspended.’

Frankly, I'm struggling to see why it hasn't been shut down:

In a letter submitted to the court, one police officer who has visited the child multiple times noted that “he is always vaping or smoking tobacco” when he met him in the community. Having challenged the children’s home staff as to how the child was able to buy these products, as he is always accompanied, the officer observed: “[They] have no reasonable answer.” The same officer wrote how the boy is “very open about the use of [cannabis] and … smokes it in the house and bedroom in an open manner … The on-site care staff are aware and never challenge him”.

 Are they being paid to? I’m guessing they are. If so, why are they not being told to do their job or GTFO..?

The boy is subject to a deprivation of liberty order, in which a local authority can ask the high court for permission to deprive a child of their liberty for their own protection. This occurs when they do not meet the criteria to be sectioned under the Mental Health Act. A deprivation of liberty order allows a child in an unregistered placement – because no secure registered placement is available – to be subject to restrictions on their liberty. Upon hearing the boy is subject to the order, Lieven said such a situation continuing could be seen as “a legal sticking plaster” for a “wholly unacceptable” standard of care.

That’s because it’s what it is. I very much doubt he’s the only young thug in these circumstances, and we are likely to need more and more of these places, thanks to the standards of parenting in this country, so why aren’t we building them and staffing them appropriately?

Open Up Another Cell...

...and put those who freed him in it.

A Jack the Ripper obsessive who tried to kill a pensioner in a barbaric riverside knife attack had been freed after a warning he posed an imminent risk of 'serious injury and potentially death', a court has heard.

It's the only thing that will work. After all, all those reports that judges call for clearly mean nothing... 

Anthony Roberts was jailed for life with a minimum term of 28 years and nine months on Tuesday by a judge who said the circumstances of the 56-year-old's release 'were for others to examine'.

Examine, and actually act on. There needs to be consequences for failure. 

The court was told Roberts, of Green Hill, Worcester, has a chromosomal disorder and was diagnosed with an 'untreatable' psychopathic personality disorder in 1993.

Passing sentence, Mrs Justice Ellenbogen said she had read six parole assessment reports written in 2013, 2016, 2017, 2019, 2020 and 2021. The final report in May 2021, the judge said, found that Roberts - who absconded from prison in 2019 - posed a risk of harm specific to females aged 16-30 and of 'serious injury and potential death of any female victim'.

'She (the report's author) assessed the risk as imminent and high,' the judge added.

And what do those tasked with oversight say? Would you believe, Reader, the usual? 

A Ministry of Justice spokesperson said: 'This was a despicable crime and our heartfelt sympathies are with the victim and their family.

'A Serious Further Offence review is underway to establish the full facts of the case and it would be inappropriate to comment further at this stage.'

Ah, a review. More cosy make-work for the State's apparatchiks.  

If Only It Was Really 'Shocking'...

Bradford descended into lawlessness yesterday afternoon after a brawl outside the city's magistrates' court led to huge crowds clashing with police.

Yes, the demographic of these 'crowds' are exactly as you'd imagine... 

Youths wearing hoodies and masks were filmed charging after police vehicles and hitting them, as officers attempted to get away from the disorder.At one point a BMW X5 regularly used by armed police, was chased by several men before one appeared to kick it, prompting the driver to hit the brakes and reverse towards crowds before stopping and driving off. In another clip, firearms cops were seen sprinting through the city centre while a large group of officers attempted to hold back crowds at the entrance to the shopping precinct in Market Street.

Once again, the police are too cowed by frequent assaults on them from the usual suspects to treat this as what it is. 

The mayhem has outraged civic leaders, who today insisted Bradford was 'safe' and the city centre was 'open for business'.

*hollow laughter* 

City ward Councillor Nazam Azam said those responsible for the 'abhorrent' incident - widely shared on social media - will feel the full wrath of the law.

'We will not allow this to take place in our city. The perpetrators will be dealt with accordingly and the harshest possible treatment given to them for their actions... They will get the book thrown at them.'

Sadly, if they do, it'll be a paperback. And it'll probably miss. 

You Know What Else Is 'Not Proven', Sandy?

Critics of the not proven verdict, which dates from the 17th century, say it creates confusion for jurors and can stigmatise people amid limited public understanding it is an acquittal.

It's that you have the slightest clue about what you're doing.  

In the biggest shake-up of the legal system for decades, the centuries-old third option for jurors will be axed in a bid to increase Scotland's low rape conviction rate.

Is that a goal worth pursuing? Maybe. But it certainly isn't a goal worth overturning centuries of law for, as the lawyers themselves point out to her, not that she's listening: 

As part of the changes, victims will have their own 'tsar' to stand up for their rights – and a specialist sex crimes court will be set up.

Sandy Brindley, chief executive of Rape Crisis Scotland, said: 'There is a huge amount of research and evidence to suggest that these steps will not only make engaging with the justice system easier for survivors but lead to more justice being done.'

Justice for whom, exactly, Sandy? 

Murray Etherington, president of the Law Society of Scotland, backed by the Faculty of Advocates, criticised the proposed pilot scheme to allow judges to try people for rape – which carries a possible life sentence – without juries.

He said: 'Juries act as an essential and effective safeguard against the potential for unconscious biases to unfairly influence trial outcomes. Even on a pilot basis, judge-only trials will put that fundamental right in jeopardy, with no discernible benefits.'

And that's not all they have to be wary of in this bill: 

The Victims, Witnesses and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill, will also change the size of criminal juries from 15 to 12, with eight guilty verdicts enough to secure a conviction – compared to a minimum of ten in England, where unanimous decisions are strongly encouraged.

Once again, Scotland's leading the race to the bottom... 

Ms Brindley said she has 'no doubt that guilty men are walking free'.

Never heard of Blackstone's Ratio have you, Sandy? 

Danger Is In Their Job Description, Judge...

Sentencing was adjourned because Richards refused to leave his cell. He refused to do so again today when he was jailed for life.

Judge Jeremy Richardson KC told Sheffield Crown Court: 'I regard the refusal of the defendant to attend court to be an act of cowardice. His arrogance is also demonstrated by this conduct.

'It is plain the defendant is replete with habitual violence. It is deeply ingrained. He is, in my judgment, an exceptionally volatile and dangerous man.

'I have my doubts whether it will ever be safe to release him.'

So, why not have him dragged before the court, as you can do? 

He added that he was 'not prepared to endanger the lives of prison officers to secure his attendance' by exercising the powers available to him.

*sighs*