Blog

There are many who could argue that I know 'jack shit' about the law and parole boards. They could be nearly right! 

This bloke Warboys commited a string of serious crimes. He was then prosecuted and received an indeterminate sentence from a judge. Because his sentence was/is indeterminate, he is allowed to have a parole board look at his continued position in prison (much as they do with many hundreds of prisoners each year) or whether he should be released. The parole board on the evidence submitted said that he should be released early.

The crime he commited, rape, was heinious. Many would argue that rapists cannot be reformed and statistically there is much academic evidence to support this. Any parole boards determination is 'rule set' and surely must never be swaged by any current academic thinking. The same set of rules must apply to all prisoners. Popularist and public opinion should not count in any judgement - the rules and law must take presidence. 

Once the news was announced that 'Warboys' was to be released there were protests, many of which were legitimate in my mind. There is a likelyhood that he could re-offend, but my opinion does not count. Why should it as he has not commited a crime on me 

But hold on, I protect my right to free speech and give a bit of lay persons judgement.

We have seen the decision overturned by judges yesterday, from the concerns of two females and their accusations. These females are yet determined to be victims,  they are currently only complainants. So far they have failed to get the listening ear or the Police or the CPS. Why? There maybe heaps of truth in their allegations and they might fall into the associated  'wrecked lives victims' group as a direct result of this blokes actions, but their cases have not been through a criminal court hearing to establish the truth.

So, yet again, a court has determined from allegations that this bloke has done all the things they claim, without a criminal court hearing and we bulldoze the doctrine of 'Innocent until proven guilty'. The press have all reported that there maybe over a hundred females who have been subject to his criminality. Surely somewhere along the line we should be sending in the 'Met' into, as it were, 'Feel his colar' and charge him with further offences. That would have kept him banged up on bail at least, if not continuing his interminate sentence, ensuring that the public are safe.

I recognise that the judges were deciding if Warboys was a fit and proper person to be released. I think I would be considered naive to think the judge (s) did not take into account the public outrage and a claimed 100 other cases (none of which have yet had the satisfaction of court prosecution of his harrassing, assualting and decitful behaviour). My take is that the judge(s) have tried and prosecuted him, outside of a criminal court on the strength of accusation alone. 

This is 'kangaroo court' stuff that would be worthy of Russian Justice. 

(Appendix: I was profiled and judged wrongly, this is fact. Believe me when I say your immediate 'judgement' on people is very different to those of us who have been wrongly judged! I am quick to defend all those judged as guilty before a trial, as they should be considered 'innocent until the evidence of a trial is brought forward and leads to the defendant being proved guilty!)