From today's Sheffield Star:

Master car thief dies in horror road smash
A PROLIFIC thief who stole luxury cars from Sheffield garages while posing as a high-flying businessman has died in a road smash - behind the wheel of a stolen vehicle.

AColin Sadd was jailed for six years in 2004 and branded one of the UK's most active car criminals after admitting making off with 36 vehicles worth £320,000 from garages across Sheffield. But Sadd's long life of crime, during which he amassed 155 convictions and spent a total of 18 years in jail, came to an end when he ploughed a stolen Vauxhall Astra into a lorry on the busy A59 Liverpool Old Road in Lancashire.

One question - if he was jailed for six years in 2004, what was he doing out?

Lets just hope he didn't injure anyone else when he was picking up his Darwin Award

That's exactly what I thought! Apparantly some people were slightly injured but nothing too serious (thank God).

18 years in prison. How did "justice fail"?

luxury cars, vauxhall astra.
two phrases not often heard in the same story.

One question - if he was jailed for six years in 2004, what was he doing out?

If he had been in prison on remand in the time between being charged and being sentenced and that period was long enough (and according to reports about his most recent conviction that I've found there was a gap of more than three months between him admitting the offences and being sentenced) he could have been due for release early this year given that he admitted the offences in late 2003.

http://www.sheffieldtoday.net/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=58&ArticleID=712804

http://www.sheffieldtoday.net/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=58&ArticleID=770270

luxury cars, vauxhall astra.
two phrases not often heard in the same story.

The Star doesn't worry about accuracy too often ;)

That's exactly what I thought! Apparantly some people were slightly injured but nothing too serious (thank God).


apart from one man who has died- criminal or not he didn't really deserve to die.

Didn't he?

At least he's no longer the tax payers concern when inside prison, nor a maggot on society when he's out.

Had a similar case the other year. The guy who stabbed me was not given a custodial sentance due to our ages at the time of the incident. However, I did read in the Star that he was killed in a Car Crash.

Didn't he?

At least he's no longer the tax payers concern when inside prison, nor a maggot on society when he's out.

Well we may as well go back to the dark ages and hang every criminal then.

I know he may not have been a very nice man but NO-ONE deserves to die like that in a horrible car crash- sorry.

18 years in prison. How did "justice fail"?

Well if this guy spent 18 years in jail... then died whist driving a stolen car I really dont think he learned his lesson in prison did he?

Susie
xx

Well we may as well go back to the dark ages and hang every criminal then.

Sounds good to me......you dont do owt wrong, and you've nowt to worry about.

Well we may as well go back to the dark ages and hang every criminal then.



Sorry I wasn't aware everything in life had to be Black or White :rolleyes:

IMO he lived by the sword and died by the sword.

I can't say I have any sympathy, apart from for for the truck driver he crashed into. He was a robbing scally why deserved all he got in my opinion!

you know what they say,what goes around comes around,just glad he didnt kill anyone else:confused:

Sounds good to me......you dont do owt wrong, and you've nowt to worry about.

Funny, you'd best tell all the dead people who crashed their own cars that they're not really dead.

Well if this guy spent 18 years in jail... then died whist driving a stolen car I really dont think he learned his lesson in prison did he?


He didn't but one of the reports about a previous court case in The Star described him as having "significant psychiatric problems" and "an addictive personality" and talked about his "obsession" (which included cleaning cars he had stolen). If he had been suffering from a serious mental illness prison wouldn't have been likely to cure it.

Why is he referred to as a master car thief. He's a thieving scumbag, who has inflicted misery on people, and now got his comeuppance.

Sorry, but I'm shedding no tears for this one.

He didn't but one of the reports about a previous court case in The Star described him as having "significant psychiatric problems" and "an addictive personality" and talked about his "obsession" (which included cleaning cars he had stolen). If he had been suffering from a serious mental illness prison wouldn't have been likely to cure it.

If he had "significant psychiatric problems" he would have been assessed somewhere like Rampton or Middlewood before being sentenced, no doubt some do fall through the system though.

What a load of fascistic comments. Do you really believe that it's good for society for a car thief to DIE???? I have been repeatedly amazed by the extremism on this forum and this thread is a classic.

Where would you stop?

"Speeding offenders deserve to die."

"Stealing food - kill the hungry b*stards."

"Benefit and tax fraudsters..wouldn't it be great if they all just went and died?"

Please get a grip on reality and remember that we live in a so called civilised society.

Thank you

Well if this guy spent 18 years in jail... then died whist driving a stolen car I really dont think he learned his lesson in prison did he?

Susie
xx

The point I was trying to make was that he had served his time so justice was done, hence my original pop at the title of this thread.

Thanks

How can you say justice was done, when the minute he got out of prison he was stealing cars again?

The fact that he died in a car he had stolen was justice, he made his own choices.

I agree with twofour-yes he did wrong but for people to think that his death is somehow justice is disgracefull. We've all done things we are not proud of and some of us have broken the law,(quick,round up the firing squad) Ive had a car stolen and yes,it ****** me off and really inconvenienced me, but it is,at the end of the day,a car.
surely,a human life is worth more?........

he decided how much his life was worth when he chose to steal a car and drive off in it.

IMO

:suspect: You'll be telling me that shoplifters should have their hands chopped off next?:

The guy got what he deserved ( live by the sword ,you die by the sword )
rather him than some innocent by-stander.

I don't think he deserved to die just from the having stolen cars point of view. However by repeatedly stealing cars and no doubt driving them in a dangerous fashion he was taking his life, and those of others into his own hands, and eventually, his luck ran out.

What a load of fascistic comments. Do you really believe that it's good for society for a car thief to DIE???? I have been repeatedly amazed by the extremism on this forum and this thread is a classic.


Yes I do believe that. What good was he to society? And maybe you should stop being amazed and consider the fact that people are becoming angry at the failure of the justice system to hand out anything like meaningful punishment to thieves and murderers and if any ordinary people actually had a say in this, criminals would receive a punishment that fitted the crime.

What a load of fascistic comments. Do you really believe that it's good for society for a car thief to DIE???? I have been repeatedly amazed by the extremism on this forum and this thread is a classic.

Where would you stop?

"Speeding offenders deserve to die."

"Stealing food - kill the hungry b*stards."

"Benefit and tax fraudsters..wouldn't it be great if they all just went and died?"

Please get a grip on reality and remember that we live in a so called civilised society.

Thank you


Speeding offenders - No, not if they're just making headway in safe conditions.
Stealing (anything) – Yes, if it's their second offence.
Benefit and tax fraudsters. Yes - that way my taxes don't pay for the scum.
Car thieves? Absolutely, I’d pay to pull the lever on the gallows and watch the parasite twitch.
Bleeding heart lefty do-gooders who protect the rights of scum who should have no human rights? Oh yes.

Our society may be 'civilised' but it laughably tolerant - and the ones laughing are the thieves and cheats. I'd even be happier paying my ridiculously high taxes to our lefty government if I thought a few pence of it went towards executing thieves and benefit cheats.

To day a young 17yr old was killed by a hit and run driver (car believed to be stolen) .The young boy was dragged for over1mile before the car wheels spat out his shredded body .( I only hope he died on impact ,little consolation to his parents) I also hope the bast**ds responsable crash the next car they steal and burn ,to me thats were they belong in hell .To many innocent people die through those that steal cars ,It's the only deterent they deserve enough said.

Sadly though, there are plenty of do-gooders who will claim that the car thieves need help, understanding and safaris to educate and reintegrate them into a lawful society.

Better to euthenise them and spend the money on people who deserve it.

My personal view about the car thief..
http://www.glowfoto.com/viewimage.php?y=2006&m=02&img=27-124931L&t=jpg&rand=5534&srv=img2

Nice one :thumbsup:

Nice one :thumbsup:

No worries! :)
I think it needs to be said though dont you

apart from one man who has died- criminal or not he didn't really deserve to die.

I live on Planet Earth...what Planet are you from?

Oh I forgot the car he was driving when he crashed ,is it ok !!!!!!

apart from one man who has died- criminal or not he didn't really deserve to die.

OH YES HE DID! :D :D :D
I just love it when scum like this meet a sticky end, and they don't come much stickier than what happened to him. :hihi:

At least it wasn't some other innocent motorist or bystander that got killed because of the actions of this piece of crap. :clap: :clap:

Sadly though, there are plenty of do-gooders who will claim that the car thieves need help, understanding and safaris to educate and reintegrate them into a lawful society.

Better to euthenise them and spend the money on people who deserve it.
Would that be people like you then,oh saint like person?!

Sadly though, there are plenty of do-gooders who will claim that the car thieves need help, understanding and safaris to educate and reintegrate them into a lawful society.

Better to euthenise them and spend the money on people who deserve it.
Why is the opposite point of view always exaggerated? I'm neither particularily happy, or particularily sad edit: in this case, but the loss of a human life is a bad thing most of the time (even if they've broken the law in the past). I'm not sure in this case, but a friend of mine (never done a bad thing in his life) had two of his lifelong friends die in a car crash because they were joyriding - he still can't drive along that stretch of road, and it did affect everyone concerned - his family and friends.

Just because I think/feel that way, doesn't mean I don't want justice - by all means, people should be locked up for longer, and more fitting punishments handed out. I feel I was lucky in that my parents cared enough about me to give me a proper moral education, others are not so lucky. They may deserve to go to prison for a long, long time, but very few people deserve to die for their wrongdoings.

By the way bartfarst, I accidentally stole a bottle of coke from the co-op once (didn't realise I hadn't paid for it), and again, stole some popcorn from the cinema without realising (they didn't charge me for it) - do I now deserve to die?

I'm not a saint, but I obey the law, pay my taxes, support a number of charities, help my elderly neighbours, work hard, sometimes risk my life for Queen and country, pity the victims of crime and have no pity for criminals.

Do those qualities and actions make me a bad person?

Alex you're being silly about the popcorn.

Thieves are a plague on society and do not deserve life.

They deserve death, as do joyriders, whose 'joy' is other people's misery.

I'm not a saint, but I obey the law, pay my taxes, support a number of charities, help my elderly neighbours, work hard, sometimes risk my life for Queen and country, pity the victims of crime and have no pity for criminals.

Do those qualities and actions make me a bad person?

Looking at an earlier post, it seems you condone speeding as acceptable behaviour. So do you speed?

I'm not a saint, but I obey the law, pay my taxes, support a number of charities, help my elderly neighbours, work hard, sometimes risk my life for Queen and country, pity the victims of crime and have no pity for criminals.

Do those qualities and actions make me a bad person?

I'd say- you were a saint!
And we need more people like you in this country.

So it's ok to inflict misery on others as long as misery is not inflicted on them .
And he did'nt accidently steal the car nor did he ever intend to pay for it,he certainly paid for his crime ,like all others he did'nt give a dam about his family,friends or anyone else if he did he would'nt have done it.

Yes, sometimes as much as 71 in a 70:o . For goodness' sake man, there isn't a driver in the country who doesn't exceed the speed limits to lesser or greater extent, or hasn't done at some time.

That said, no, on the whole I don't because I have a long commute and the easiest way to do it is set off early and potter along behind the wagons at a leisurely pace, conserving fuel.

I do speed on the racetrack, and I do on occasion exceed the limits a little on open roads - just as every driver on the road in front of and behind me does.

Quite what that has to do with the previous posts, I'm sure you'll explain. :confused:

Yes, sometimes as much as 71 in a 70:o . For goodness' sake man, there isn't a driver in the country who doesn't exceed the speed limits to lesser or greater extent, or hasn't done at some time.

That said, no, on the whole I don't because I have a long commute and the easiest way to do it is set off early and potter along behind the wagons at a leisurely pace, conserving fuel.

I do speed on the racetrack, and I do on occasion exceed the limits a little on open roads - just as every driver on the road in front of and behind me does.

Quite what that has to do with the previous posts, I'm sure you'll explain. :confused:

Only because you are breaking the law too.

It has serious consequences as I can testify. I am disabled years before my time because of someone who thought speeding was OK.

But he did get what he deserved.

Had he learned his lesson from his extensive spells in prison - he probably would not be dead;
had he not stolen the car - he probably would not be dead;
If we had an effective system of rehabilitation and coming down hard on 'career criminals' at an early stage, then maybe the prisons wouldn't be full to bursting - and maybe this individual would not have continued his crimes which ultimately led to his death.

Mod note:

Things are ok at the moment, but I have this admin induced feeling in my water that this thread might get a bit heated very shortly. Can we make sure we keep it civilised folks?

Thanks :)

Mathom, that's terrible and I genuinely empathise - a dear old friend of mine was severely disabled when in the back seat of a car driven stupidly many years ago (despite his protests). He died a just a couple of years ago as a result of the long term effects of his injuries.

I don't support speeding per se on the public highways, and I would join you in condemning irresponsible speeding and driving, but I do, as agreed by all of the Policemen I know, believe that road safety depends on prevailing conditions, not exact speeds, and that any road may be safe at very different speeds from one day (or minute) to the next - somebody travelling at 25mph through a crowded street might be irresponsible, while 75 or 80mph on a clear, dry motorway isn't - that's why the Police won't pull at that kind of speed if conditions are safe.

However, we're way off thread here. I'd just end this one by fully agreeing with you that somebody speeding and causing an accident does indeed deserve anything that they receive through the courts (and I'll be hoping for a place in the public gallery to watch Mr Naseem Hamed go down after almost killing somebody I knew from school).

Alex you're being silly about the popcorn.

Thieves are a plague on society and do not deserve life.

They deserve death, as do joyriders, whose 'joy' is other people's misery.
You're right, I was being silly :)

But seriously, I'm still maintaining my stance that taking enjoyment from the death of someone, even if they are a criminal is close to being sick. I have been thinking about this, and figured something along the lines of (for minor crimes, obviously) reducing an initial sentence by maybe 10% and then increasing the sentence for second and more crimes by 500% (5x longer after their first offence) - similar to the three strikes law in America.

edit: not sure why I said reduce the initial sentence, increasing it would be better :)

Alex, I'm totally with you on that, though realistically I think the first penalty shouldn't be lowered or it would in itself be seen by some imbeciles as an incentive to risk a 'light consequence' for their first offence.

I wouldn't take pleasure in somebody's death, but I also wouldn't feel a shred of sympathy or feeling for 'people' who have, in my own intolerant view, given up their 'right' to human rights.

I don't take any pleasure out of the mans death, but I do feel he died by his own hand, luckily this time not taking anyone else with him.

We all make judgement calls, you see stories of them every day, racing driver killed on second lap, jockey thrown off his horse, drug addict OD'd, soldier shot in the war.

They're all emotional situations, but every last one of them knew what they were getting involved in and that their life would be at risk.

Alex, I'm totally with you on that, though realistically I think the first penalty shouldn't be lowered or it would in itself be seen by some imbeciles as an incentive to risk a 'light consequence' for their first offence.

I wouldn't take pleasure in somebody's death, but I also wouldn't feel a shred of sympathy or feeling for 'people' who have, in my own intolerant view, given up their 'right' to human rights.
Sorry, the comment about taking pleasure was more aimed at the users who've expressed it - I don't feel any sympathy for this person, but I do feel sympathetic towards the people it affects - and I don't think they deserved to die.

As for my proposal, the reasoning behind decreasing the initial sentence slightly is to reduce the prison population somewhat - of course, that all depends if the thought of a very long stretch for something minor is actually a deterrant - reducing the length of sentences in the first instance would help put this into practice with slightly less cost, but I accept in an ideal world, sentences for most things are a bit short at the moment, and you'd raise them all

Yes I do believe that. What good was he to society? And maybe you should stop being amazed and consider the fact that people are becoming angry at the failure of the justice system to hand out anything like meaningful punishment to thieves and murderers and if any ordinary people actually had a say in this, criminals would receive a punishment that fitted the crime.

read my lips...he stole cars

Speeding offenders - No, not if they're just making headway in safe conditions.
Stealing (anything) – Yes, if it's their second offence.
Benefit and tax fraudsters. Yes - that way my taxes don't pay for the scum.
Car thieves? Absolutely, I’d pay to pull the lever on the gallows and watch the parasite twitch.
Bleeding heart lefty do-gooders who protect the rights of scum who should have no human rights? Oh yes.

Our society may be 'civilised' but it laughably tolerant - and the ones laughing are the thieves and cheats. I'd even be happier paying my ridiculously high taxes to our lefty government if I thought a few pence of it went towards executing thieves and benefit cheats.

Everyone has human rights I'm afraid your views appear extreme, judgmental and fascistic. What has given you the right to judge? Are you perfect?

Why do you endorse speeding which is dangerous but not benefit fraud which is not. I can't make sense of your logic.

Regards

How can you say justice was done, when the minute he got out of prison he was stealing cars again?

The fact that he died in a car he had stolen was justice, he made his own choices.

He did the crime and served the time. That's the way justice works. Please tell me why you don't agree with that.

The guy got what he deserved ( live by the sword ,you die by the sword )
rather him than some innocent by-stander.

live by the sword? he was driving a stolen car. what sword?

[QUOTE=Bartfarst]I'm not a saint, but I obey the law QUOTE]


Which ones?

There's more detail on teh story in todays telegraph.

For all those who thought the guy got what he deserved. A little more information.

He was diagnosed with a psychiatric problem.
He stole the cars from garages by taking them for a test drive (thus no damage). Generally he would then wash them in a car wash. Hand polish them and leave them undamaged for the police to reunite with their owners.

The guy needed treatment, not jail, no wonder he carried on committing the crime.

I don't take any pleasure out of the mans death, but I do feel he died by his own hand, luckily this time not taking anyone else with him.

We all make judgement calls, you see stories of them every day, racing driver killed on second lap, jockey thrown off his horse, drug addict OD'd, soldier shot in the war.

They're all emotional situations, but every last one of them knew what they were getting involved in and that their life would be at risk.
But surely 90% of accidents involve dying by your choices - you choose to drive, if you're in a crash and die, its your own fault pretty much. You choose to cross a road and get hit by a car being driven by a maniac - you chose to cross that road, you knew the risks. The easiest example would be choosing to smoke and then dying from it; living by the sword indeed

or maybe i'm misinterpreting your argument?

edit: I can see your point, but particularily in light of Cyclones post, just because someone chose (if that can be applied to someone with an untreated compulsive disorder) to do something risky, doesn't mean that they deserve to die, or even that we should just disregard their death.

TwoFour, Bartfarst's views are a 'little right of centre' but I'm with him on the human rights thing.

Why should everybody be offered the same rights? Should people who commit wicked crimes of murder or rape, or assault the very old or the very young have the same human rights as a doctor or an innocent child? I don't think they should.

The human rights laws were developed mostly through British influence to be applied to an international community in countries where there aren't necessarily national laws. We already have laws in the UK that say you can't kill, so it's a bit silly adding on a law that says you have a right to life (as described to me by a human rights lawyer a couple of years ago who was looking forward to the mess of adding those laws to our own already robust judicial system).

Back to my point, I think we are all entitled to rights, but we have to earn them. People who commit crime, harm others and have no respect for society should not be protected by the society that they abuse and fail to contribute to.

Im sure it says in today's star that he was on the run from prison.

Im sure it says in today's star that he was on the run from prison.

I've seen that said on BBC Ceefax. I didn't know that until today and I don't know how he "absconded".

TwoFour.

Those that live by the sword,die by the sword.

(This means that violent people will be treated violently themselves.)

In retrospect i should have put.(Those that live by the car ,Die by the car)

And that is for all the scumbags that steal cars and cause untold misery by thier actions .

I have had my car stolen it cost me a lot of money to replace it and in the long run my family suffered .I work bloody hard for my family .I bet he has never done a decent days work in his life such as it was .

He may not have been violent but he violated a lot of honest hard working people by stealing from them .

Why should everybody be offered the same rights? Should people who commit wicked crimes of murder or rape, or assault the very old or the very young have the same human rights as a doctor or an innocent child? I don't think they should.

Back to my point, I think we are all entitled to rights, but we have to earn them. People who commit crime, harm others and have no respect for society should not be protected by the society that they abuse and fail to contribute to.

Wrong on both points, in my opinion. We have human rights because we are human, not because we are judged to deserve them. Who can possibly judge?

People who commit crime do so for a reason. It is society's duty to find ways to help that person contribute positively. They are still people whatever anybody on this forum may say. Our society is rightly tolerant and forgiving once justice is done. If people don't like it they are free to leave and go to live somehwere their extremist views are more acceptable. I mean capital punishment for stealing !?- it's old testament stuff this.

People that do commit crime do so because It's easier to steal.
One day you may have to look at your son or daughter, mother or father after some low life has beat the **** out of them just for a few quid/mobile phone you tell them that to forgive is divine.All i want to do is find the the evil gits,then retribution will be mine .You should have seen my son after they had finished with him.Justice is a load of ********!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

.

TwoFour, I'm afraid we disagree on the very basic tenets here. Just because somebody’s DNA allows them to walk on two legs and speak shouldn’t necessarily give them rights. I don’t think that any human being should have ‘human rights’ just for being human.

Should somebody born of a wealthy family have the right to be wealthy all their life, even when the family money has run out? Or should they have to prove themselves and work towards their own success?

I suspect that most people would agree that people should be judged by their actions, not their heritage, by which I mean that a member of the nobility is no better man than the son of a penniless crook, if that son makes good of his life and betters himself. There are obnoxious gifted, fortunate people and there are kind, polite, good-natured underprivileged people.

I’m afraid that I do not hold with automatic rights, and at the very least I think there should be a tiered system whereby people who harm others and steal form the state have their levels of rights reduced – we do this already by imprisoning them.

TwoFour, I'm afraid we disagree on the very basic tenets here. Just because somebody’s DNA allows them to walk on two legs and speak shouldn’t necessarily give them rights. I don’t think that any human being should have ‘human rights’ just for being human.

Should somebody born of a wealthy family have the right to be wealthy all their life, even when the family money has run out? Or should they have to prove themselves and work towards their own success?

I suspect that most people would agree that people should be judged by their actions, not their heritage, by which I mean that a member of the nobility is no better man than the son of a penniless crook, if that son makes good of his life and betters himself. There are obnoxious gifted, fortunate people and there are kind, polite, good-natured underprivileged people.

I’m afraid that I do not hold with automatic rights, and at the very least I think there should be a tiered system whereby people who harm others and steal form the state have their levels of rights reduced – we do this already by imprisoning them.

Agree fully, and furthermore, a person should not EXPECT respect just because they are richer, older, better placed than any other person unless they have actively earned such respect. All levels of society have their 'scum' element, and should all be looked upon and treat the same.

GB - I agree, we should all be judged by our actions.
I'd like that judgement to be based on a just and fair treatment of those that commit crime, not torture and revenge.
If we go for the latter, how are we any better than they are?
It's only easy to take the moral highground as a society when you haven't already lowered yourself to the level of the murderer or rapist.

BTW - (and this is to everyone), all the comments about the guy taking money from those who earnt it honestly and it being easier to steal, blah blah blah. The cars were never damaged, they were valleted and left to be found by the police. He didn't sell them or break them up, or burn them out. He simply drove them to a car wash, washed them, polished them, and left them.

Hardly a criminal mastermind stealing cars to order to be shipped to hong kong.

So that makes it ok then.Ill just go and take my nieghbours car and bugger of in it.And the tax payer can stump up the bill in wasted police time finding it .

No, I didn't say it made it okay.
What it did though is make it clear that the man had a mental disorder and needed treatment. It's a shame if you can't see that.

apart from one man who has died- criminal or not he didn't really deserve to die.

He didn't learn his lesson the easy way. Better he killed himself than some innocent person(s).

He didn't learn his lesson the easy way. Better he killed himself than some innocent person(s).

Yes, sending people with a mental illness to prison is bound to make them 'not be crazy' anymore isn't it.

read my lips...he stole cars

Yes. 3 single syllable words. Well done. Perhaps next week you could try something a bit harder? Meanwhile, I stand by what I said.

Sounds good to me......you dont do owt wrong, and you've nowt to worry about.
here here to many do gooders "do the crime do the time " eventually he gave himself life :(

Wrong on both points, in my opinion. We have human rights because we are human, not because we are judged to deserve them. Who can possibly judge?

People who commit crime do so for a reason. It is society's duty to find ways to help that person contribute positively. They are still people whatever anybody on this forum may say. Our society is rightly tolerant and forgiving once justice is done. If people don't like it they are free to leave and go to live somehwere their extremist views are more acceptable. I mean capital punishment for stealing !?- it's old testament stuff this.

Totally disagree. If one person commits a crime that infringes on another person rights then he or she should lose their rights until a sentence is served and they are released. I understand that when they are relased they have served their time but until that time, four brick walls with water, bread and cheese is sufficient :D

Wrong on both points, in my opinion. We have human rights because we are human, not because we are judged to deserve them. Who can possibly judge?

People who commit crime do so for a reason. It is society's duty to find ways to help that person contribute positively. They are still people whatever anybody on this forum may say. Our society is rightly tolerant and forgiving once justice is done. If people don't like it they are free to leave and go to live somehwere their extremist views are more acceptable. I mean capital punishment for stealing !?- it's old testament stuff this.

It's society's duty to first protect the innocent and punish the guilty.
The trouble is that more and more people are wanting the criminals to be mollycoddled instead of being punished. There has to be a deterrent to wrongdoings otherwise the thieves, muggers and scumbags will run riot. And when the suitable punishment has been given and received then we should offer the help. But in my opinion we should only offer it the once. And we should call a spade a spade...Joyriding = Stealing.........Happy Slapping = Assault.

Yes, but you could then argue that, in this case, its also societys duty to protect the mentally unstable - read through cyclones posts, they illustrate that this wasn't a normal criminal act, it was a compulsive disorder, which was never treated.

edit: totally agree on the giving one chance thing (as posted earlier), and on punishing criminals , in fact, all of your post in general is how it should be (imo) :)

punishment, rehabilitation and when necessary protecting society from further crime by locking the person away.

All 3 need to be incorporated or the system fails.

Yes, but you could then argue that, in this case, its also societys duty to protect the mentally unstable - read through cyclones posts, they illustrate that this wasn't a normal criminal act, it was a compulsive disorder, which was never treated.

edit: totally agree on the giving one chance thing (as posted earlier), and on punishing criminals , in fact, all of your post in general is how it should be (imo) :)


I totally agree about helping the mentally ill, the problem is that they all get their solicitors to try that excuse as an option, everything from speeding to murder seems to be down to a "mental problem". Don't know about this particular guy but if he's never had treatment for a mental illness it could be because no-one's been convinced that he's mentally ill.

did you bother to read the story anywhere?

I totally agree about helping the mentally ill, the problem is that they all get their solicitors to try that excuse as an option, everything from speeding to murder seems to be down to a "mental problem". Don't know about this particular guy but if he's never had treatment for a mental illness it could be because no-one's been convinced that he's mentally ill.
Well I must admit, I'm not a psychiatrist (and don't even have an alevel in physcology like so many people today), but stealing cars and then washing them (without damaging them) then leaving them for the police to collect isn't generally criminal behaviour, although it (obviously) is a criminal act. Cyclones posted quite a bit of this aspect of things... read back through the topic

Perhaps he was just a good conman,he could con his way into a new motor
and when caught could con every-one into thinking he had a mental problem
who's to say how the guy thought.

and he conned his way into washing and polishing and abandoning the car. that's good conning.

Maybe he just thought he could wash away his fingerprints.

This particular individual does, as a very (VERY) rare exception, seem to have been a fairly harmless eccentric, nutter perhaps, who certainly didn't fit the normal stereotype of a car thief and might deserve pity.

Most of the sentiment expressed on this thread does still apply to thieves in general and what they deserve though.

From what i've read more recently about the guy, calling him one of Britains most prolific car theives seems way extreme.

The guy was obviously not a criminal in the normal sense of the word - he didn't profit or gain from the crimes. I can't understand now why he ended up serving 18 years in prison - that in itself is a crime if he really did have a mental health problem, and it certainly sounds like he did.

Pity one of the car companies couldn't have given him a job valeting cars in return for having a 'test drive' in them.