Jump to content

woodmally

Banned
  • Content Count

    5,127
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by woodmally


  1. 1 hour ago, GinTreeS7 said:

    I would give that whole area and most of West St a miss if I were you - there is rampant drug dealing, street drinking, begging, threatening behaviour, asking money for drugs, etc going on - its not just Tescos that is suffering but surely most of the club and bar businesses in West St and the streets off it must be suffering as they have certainly lost 100% of my business as I stay away now ... a sad state of affairs .. I wonder if other cities have a similar issue with their main nighttime "going out" street (s) ....

     

     

    Its not just West Street though. You have the drunks and and druggies outside B&M near Fitzallan Square the rampant drug dealing outside the Bankers Draft and the old Lloyds Bank near the Cathedral. 

     


  2. 1 minute ago, Penistone999 said:

    SCC moan they are skint, yet some muppet in the town hall thought it was a good idea to waste money on stupidity like this. 

    Well I dont think much money was spent on it to be honest. Just the hire of a camcorder. Its not exactly an academy award winner.


  3. 5 hours ago, arrowhead said:

    the vast majority of people aren't confused.

    But the intended audience of this  video most definitely are, given physical evidence. 

    Not sure it'll make much difference as i think the problem isn't education in so much as pure laziness but i think this video is a positive step forward. 

    I agree it was tongue in cheek . I dont think its lack of knowledge as if it was you would just have incorrect waste being stored in incorrect bins not strewn around.  I hope the video will do some good but sadly I am not convinced. Oh well we live in hope.


  4. Yet not only that this "Pillar of the community" gets let off for what I would  consider an heinous crime of stealing from charity boxes. In spite of a previous judge branding him dangerous.  There is no justice in dealing with scum like him

     

    https://www.thestar.co.uk/news/career-criminal-who-stole-charity-boxes-from-sheffield-store-walks-free-from-court-1-9631898?fbclid=IwAR1p7hwDJA1NMmPDLynZGbtC3rqwE25OBtyorEG8KvI43AjBEP45dNkOjoA


  5. 13 hours ago, Cyclone said:

    No mention of why support is refused, whether it's difficult to access, comes with conditions or that they just distrust the authorities.

    Why should that matter?  If they distrust authorities well tough! They need to get over it and accept help otherwise stay on the streets. I have little time for the "evil authorities out to get them attitude". If the support comes with conditions then you accept those conditions. You dont bite the hand that feeds you.  I wish they would stop using excuses as to why they are still on the streets and take the help thats offered.


  6. 15 hours ago, melthebell said:

    Sleeper buses starting in sheffield to help the homeless

    https://www.shefnews.co.uk/2019/02/21/double-decker-bus-for-homeless-in-sheffield/

    yay or nay?

    Sadly again I dont think it will work. As it has been stated on here many times.  Many people do not engage with services.  Anthony Cunningham tried his tent city project and the council shut it down because it was turning into a drugs den. I know first hand as while it was up there was a queue of people just off my street waiting for their fix.  Anthony himself admitted that he set up a tent for them to get their injections.  Anthony is now trying to get sleeper containers set up to do the same. However I fear that again will fall in the same problem.  Yes there is lack of accommodation but also lack of engagement from the homeless and rootless.


  7. What can we do about the drunks outside B&M Wilkos and KFC near the old Castle Market. There is one particular Afro Caribbean gentleman that's completely off his face. Clearly someone is paying for his booze and its probably us taxpayers.  He dance in the street and shouts at people.  The police seem to ignore the probem. He's not the only problem but he is the worst. 


  8. 35 minutes ago, ECCOnoob said:

    Yes. 

     

    1.  Possession of something that may be used as a weapon is a wholly different crime and punishment to conducting a deliberate attack with a weapon.   

    You cant lock people up on what they "might" do in the future.

     

    2.  That yob did not "walk away" he was given a 12 month sentence.  It was suspended due to mitigating circumstances and involvement from a mental health nurse.  That's the sort of thing that get considered by a court by people who know all the facts.  

     

    3.  She had mitigating circumstances and appropriate punishment including suspended prison, supervision order and banning from locations was given by a suitably qualified Judge after hearing all the facts.  

     

    Whether YOU like it or not.  That is the law.    Different crimes have different punishments.  Charges and sentences are based on what a an offender HAS done not MAY do.   A case is heard on each individual merit.    Different cases have completley different mitigating circumstances.  

     

    If there is a genuine legal reason that a Judge or Bench has made a mistake or misinterpreted then of course there are appeals processes for such things.  After all, they are human beings and falible too.    However, that is for the parties and the lawyers to take up - not ill informed and unqualified internet chatterboxes like us. 

     

    Now, unless you have got several years of law school and experience in dealing with criminal law under your belt and have been sat in front of each and every single one of these hearings with knowledge of both sides of the arguments and sight of all relevant evidence what makes you think that the laws are incorrectly applied?

     

    As I have said before  "I personal dont like it" does not automatically equal "its wrong". 

     

     

     

     

    Ok I accept your argument for the first. But the other two. It seems that because they have mental problems they are allowed to get away with it. This woman had 42! let me repeat 42 appearances before the court and still the mental health nurse wrote a letter to get her let off. I'm  sorry but clearly she continues to defy the law and yet gets away with it on mental health grounds. If the other 42 occasions where she is punished and still does it mean that she wont do it again. As for the yob that got a suspended sentence for knocking a bus driver into the middle of next week. Why should we allow him to walk free. 

     

    Too often we think of the poor criminal here "oh they have mental illness" or "oh they have had a bad life" well frankly it should be tough. Lets think of one person in this situation and thats the victim. I dont really care about the criminals human rights because frankly they gave those up when they commited the office or the 42 offence in the case of the woman. 

     

    I dont understand the law and believe me I wish I did understand the logic in allowing the last two to walk free because it is beyond my comprehension. 


  9. 16 hours ago, Penistone999 said:

    Even tough i despise Labour and everything they stand for, it will be good to see a Lord Mayor in a suit and respecting the position , instead of an overgrown kid who disrespects the role by dressing like a  fifteen year old chav. 

    Yes and not standing on every ornate table in the city. This guy has no respect for property. If I crouched on a table like that my dad would have rightly given me a thick ear. 


  10. 16 hours ago, Top Cats Hat said:

    You do realise that you have just demolished your own argument lol 😂

     

    "But why should we take into account a persons circumstance.  A crime should be punished the same."

    No because the crime is of different magnitude so not the same. If a rich millionaire stole some sanitary products I would expect the same level of punishment. And as this person messed with a child I expect him to be punished the same way as others who do the same. 

    16 hours ago, Halibut said:

    If you're so keen on comparisons do you think an offender who, according to the Judiciary of Scotland report on the case - '' Several times during visits he touched her on her vagina, placing his hand over her vaginal area. His hand was cupped and he would press it against that area. Whenever he did this she had clothes on, either leggings or tights or pants.''  and is described as ''very young and immature'' should be dealt with in exactly the same way as a fully mature adult who tears the childs underclothes off and violently penetrates her with his fingers and threatens to kill her if she tells anyone? I don't.

    Again no I expect this person to be punished the same as others who have touched up a child in the same way and not use "young and immature" as an excuse.  


  11. 25 minutes ago, Top Cats Hat said:

    Really?

     

    A homeless woman shoplifts a packet of tampons from Poundland and is caught by a store detective.

     

    A woman who owns a care home with a million pound turnover, systematically goes through the purses and wallets of the old people in her care stealing thousands of pounds in cash and is caught by a suspicious relative.

     

    Both are the crime of theft and both women will be charged under the Theft Act (1968).

     

    Are you seriously saying that both, if convicted, should receive the same punishment? And if you are saying that, can you explain how this benefits society?

     

    Well they are not like for like. One is worth a couple of pounds the other is a theft of 100s. The distress to the victim is greater as well. I was comparing this kiddy fiddler who got let off with other nonces who didn't yet committed the same crime. Same distress to a victim.


  12. 8 minutes ago, Top Cats Hat said:

    Which is why sentencing guidelines are only guidelines. 

     

    They can then be applied 'judiciously' to take into account different individual circumstances.

    But why should we take into account a persons circumstance.  A crime should be punished the same.  He abused a child so should be punished the same as someone else abusing the child otherwise you get those with a "poor upbringing" getting away with something another pedophile wouldnt.   The law should be applied the same to all. Sadly it is not.  


  13. The problem is that there is never any clarity on how decisions are made. I know we cannot know the full details of this case but it seems that there are a lot of judicial decisions that to us members of the public do not understand.     Take this example.  Thousands of motorists have over 12 points and can still drive. These are vehicles that can kill yet they still keep their cars. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-40862975


  14. 1 minute ago, El Cid said:

    That is a very negative tone, how would you make people change?

    Not that obviously as it wont work. Firstly because some kids will use it as an excuse not to go to school and secondly it will have no impact.  Better to educate kids to reduce carbon footprint. Encourage parents to do better. Energy saving is a good example. Not driving 5 mins down the road to school and parking outside is another.   There are lots of positive actions that can work. This will have no impact at all. 


  15. So looks like climate change will be sorted now.  So all these children have decided not to turn up to school this has caused all the major polluters to suddenly change their policies and reduce climate change. 

     

    See we dont have to worry about it now.  All sorted 

     

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/feb/15/uk-climate-change-strike-school-pupils-children-environment-protest

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.