Teenager who sexually abused a child given absolute discharge

[lottiecass 17]

35 minutes ago, Top Cats Hat said:

And you know that how? Because the OP said so?

 

That's the problem with these dog whistle reactionary petitions. Everyone gets very excited and starts sharing it on their facebooks getting all worked up and annoyed in the process without thinking "Hang on a minute, is any of this this actually true?"

 

AN ABSOLUTE DISCHARGE IS A CRIMINAL CONVICTION AND THE OFFENDER WILL HAVE A CRIMINAL RECORD!

 

Even if a million people sign the petition, it will still not make it not a criminal conviction.  🙄

 

 

On the sex offenders register ? it appears not because he wouldn't be able to be a dentist. The thing he should have had done is that, sod his job prospects. You have just contradicted yourself tch  is it a criminal record or not?

[nikki-red 308]

48 minutes ago, Top Cats Hat said:

And you know that how? Because the OP said so?

 

That's the problem with these dog whistle reactionary petitions. Everyone gets very excited and starts sharing it on their facebooks getting all worked up and annoyed in the process without thinking "Hang on a minute, is any of this this actually true?"

 

AN ABSOLUTE DISCHARGE IS A CRIMINAL CONVICTION AND THE OFFENDER WILL HAVE A CRIMINAL RECORD!

 

Even if a million people sign the petition, it will still not make it not a criminal conviction.  🙄

 

 

 

Quote

The ruling means that Daniel has been convicted of child abuse but will not have a criminal record and will not be put on the sex offenders register.

From...https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/naive-teenager-christopher-daniel-who-abused-girl-was-just-curious-mmhnjwc59

(You have to subscribe to read the full article, sorry)

[Top Cats Hat 10]

6 minutes ago, lottiecass said:

You have just contradicted yourself tch  is it a criminal record or not?

Maybe you could point out where I have contradicted myself? 😂

[lottiecass 17]

5 minutes ago, Top Cats Hat said:

Maybe you could point out where I have contradicted myself? 😂

you have put an absolute discharge means he will have a record,followed by the petition won't make it a criminal offence. I hope this is reviewed and he gets his proper justice, not this mockery.

Edited February 13, 2019 by lottiecass
addition

[ECCOnoob 1,050]

4 minutes ago, lottiecass said:

you have put an absolute discharge means he will have a record,followed by the petition won't make it a criminal offence. I hope this is reviewed and he gets his proper justice, not this mockery.

What do you mean "proper justice"???   What mockery are you on about?

 

 

[Top Cats Hat 10]

2 minutes ago, lottiecass said:

you have put an absolute discharge means he will have a record,followed by the petition won't make it a criminal offence.

No, what I said is that an absolute discharge is a criminal conviction and no amount of signatures on a petition will make it not a criminal conviction.

 

I have just seen that the conviction was under Scottish law therefore the conviction is not recorded as it would be under UK law.

 

 

[lottiecass 17]

1 minute ago, Top Cats Hat said:

No, what I said is that an absolute discharge is a criminal conviction and no amount of signatures on a petition will make it not a criminal conviction.

 

I have just seen that the conviction was under Scottish law therefore the conviction is not recorded as it would be under UK law.

 

 

Hopefully a review can alter that, and the judge wants sacking. Mitigation ,he  was naïve.

[ECCOnoob 1,050]

7 minutes ago, lottiecass said:

Hopefully a review can alter that, and the judge wants sacking. Mitigation ,he  was naïve.

What makes you such an expert on the matter?   How the hell do you know anything about the mitigation that was even pleaded. 

 

I never understand reactionaries like you (and the multiple others).     I know better.  What I say is right.   I can make a better Judgment.  Call that Justice..    blah blah blah. 

 

Its pathetic

 

Unless you were there in the court room observing every single piece of eveidence and hearing every single argument with the legal qualifications required to make an informed Judgment you have no basis to make such comments.

 

The only people with any sway in whether it should be challenged and appealed will be the lawyers and parties actually involved in the case.  Everyone else is just giving a load of hot air on whatever side of the story they choose to pick to suit their own agenda.   Guess what, trial by emotional reactionary social media storms is not justice.

 

 

Edited February 13, 2019 by ECCOnoob

[woodview 10]

16 minutes ago, Top Cats Hat said:

No, what I said is that an absolute discharge is a criminal conviction and no amount of signatures on a petition will make it not a criminal conviction.

 

I have just seen that the conviction was under Scottish law therefore the conviction is not recorded as it would be under UK law.

 

 

So are you saying now that when you wrote:

 

AN ABSOLUTE DISCHARGE IS A CRIMINAL CONVICTION AND THE OFFENDER WILL HAVE A CRIMINAL RECORD!

You were wrong? 

[Top Cats Hat 10]

3 minutes ago, lottiecass said:

Hopefully a review can alter that, and the judge wants sacking. Mitigation ,he  was naïve.

First of all it was a Sheriff not a judge and secondly how come you, who had probably never heard of the case until a couple of hours ago, suddenly know more about this case than the judge who has been involved the whole way through this case? 

[lottiecass 17]

7 minutes ago, ECCOnoob said:

What makes you such an expert on the matter?   How the hell do you know anything about the mitigation that was even pleaded. 

 

I never understand reactionaries like you (and the multiple others).     I know better.  What I say is right.   I can make a better Judgment.  Call that Justice..    blah blah blah. 

 

Its pathetic

 

Unless you were there in the court room observing every single piece of eveidence and hearing every single argument with the legal qualifications required to make an informed Judgment you have no basis to make such comments.

 

The only people with any sway in whether it should be challenged and appealed will be the lawyers and parties actually involved in the case.  Everyone else is just giving a load of hot air on whatever side of the story they choose to pick to suit their own agenda.   Guess what, trial by emotional reactionary social media storms is not justice.

 

 

I make my opinion on what was published, you say its pathetic, ask the 6yr olds parents who they agree with.

[woodview 10]

6 minutes ago, Top Cats Hat said:

First of all it was a Sheriff not a judge and secondly how come you, who had probably never heard of the case until a couple of hours ago, suddenly know more about this case than the judge who has been involved the whole way through this case? 

Well, if we were talking about capital punishment, you'd be banging on about miscarriages of justice through the ages.

But all of a sudden, because a paedophile has been released scot free, the justice system cant be questioned. How come????