![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
Words fail me—Domestic abuse goes unpunished
Executive who branded wife with iron freed with a £2,000 fine:
Prison has three functions: Punish, protect and rehabilitate. This guy seems barely able to acknowledge he's done wrong, but because he has a busy job he can just pay it off?
Via Katy at The Devil's Kitchen.
A report recommended a community service order, but Recorder William Featherby questioned how Read would fit it in around his long working hours.So branding your wife with a hot iron isn't worthy of punishment in and of itself? A £2K fine (about a weeks pay for this guy) is going to sort it all out?
He said he was concerned that Read had denied the offences despite overwhelming evidence and he called the iron attack "appalling".
But the judge said it was the circumstances of the marriage that had provoked Read and that now those circumstances had gone, sending him to prison would "help no one".
Prison has three functions: Punish, protect and rehabilitate. This guy seems barely able to acknowledge he's done wrong, but because he has a busy job he can just pay it off?
Judith Stephenson, of Women's Aid, said: "This case is extremely worrying. It takes an enormous amount of courage for a woman to go to court and this sentence may deter other women from doing so."That people (predominantly but not exclusively women) become trapped in abusive relationships and feel they can't get out is something I can't relate to, can't understand. But I know it happens, and it has happened to people I like and respect. To have the court system then effectively dismiss it out of hand is horrifying.
Via Katy at The Devil's Kitchen.
no subject
Me: "Who did this?"
Friend: "insert name of bf here"
Bf's friends: "NAH UH! SHE DID IT TO HERSELF FOR ATTENTION!"
Guess who everyone believes...
yeah, because I know breaking 5 fingers is such an easy task and one I do often when i'm very upset. *eyeroll*
no subject
Hopefully, progress will continue. Hopefully.
no subject
He burned her with the iron BECAUSE SHE HAD FAILED TO PRESS A SHIRT HE WANTED TO WEAR TO A BEACH PARTY. Then he slashed her with a knife while she was sleeping and pummelled her with his fists when she woke up, and beat her up again the following day. BECAUSE SHE HAD FORGOTTEN TO MAKE HIS SANDWICHES.
And he gets away with a fine for £2K???
The mad fucking bastard should be locked up! Who gives a FUCK how busy his job is? If his bosses are sane they'll fire the maniac in any case so he'll have plenty of free time!
Any judge who would make such a ludicrous ruling is clearly unfit to hold the position.
no subject
*vomits*
no subject
People like this little shit makes me ashamed I have a penis. I do not want them walking around on my planet.
no subject
Good grief. That whole case is just disgusting.
no subject
Yeah, after claiming she was a "self harmer." A self-harming contortionist if she can burn herself in the back with an iron!
no subject
Well, at least they put a giant picture of the jerkoff on that article. Perhaps then people will spit on him as he walks the streets.
It's even sadder that he still has that 90K job. Hmph.
no subject
I would hope the negative publicity will lead to him being fired. Unless his bosses and all their clients are also emotionally retarded abusive sons of bitches.
no subject
OTOH, I'm also strongly in favour of separating professional existence with personal life. Even so, I'd not want to work with him, or encounter him in my business dealings.
no subject
Generally I agree about keeping professional and personal lives separate, but in an extreme case like this where someone has shown themselves to be a truly repugnant human being, I think it's impossible to keep them apart.
no subject
Just look at him. He's going to go on doing it.
Makes ones faith in the judiciary system really boost, eh?
no subject
Completely the wrong message and approach.
no subject
Not sending him to jail I can understand - there is overcrowding and I think prison sentences should primarily be a tool to prevent re-offending, with secondary roles as punnishment and deterrant. However a) suspended sentence. b) Why the hell is his convinence an overriding concern when passing down sentence!? And if you're going to hand down a fine, hand down a fine that actually means something.
Meh, most of it's been said above so I'll not go on further.
no subject
Assuming that's still Bradshaw, I'd be very interested in his response.
Think I agree overall though, suspended sentence minimum, and some sort of treatment programme; definite rage issues if nothing else.
no subject
Nor, more importantly does it say what exactly he was found guilty of, either. In the absence of any evidence of the injuries, and his denial, it'd be her word against his. Chances of securing a conviction on that are pretty slim; the CPS may have gone for a lesser charge with a higher chance of conviction. Sad, unfair, but not unusual.
None of which makes him any of an odious shit, obviously, but it might make the court's ruling a bit more understandable.
no subject
no subject
no subject
Worth observing that Katy (who I got the link from) is a barrister in her day job, and she's not prone to go direct for scare stories, her write up is rather good.
One thing I didn't really stress on my write up is a gut reaction that he was let off lightly given his background/education and job—I suspect if a building site labourer had done similar he'd have been straight to jail; no evidence, just a gut reaction.
It is the Mail though, and I haven't searched elsewhere for more (yet), I might do later.
no subject
I thought the same thing myself. I wonder if the judge might also have been a Cambridge man? But I didn't mention it because I thought it might look like Scottish prejudice!
no subject
That said, the bottom end of the range is supposed to be a community sentence. Sentencing guidelines are here:
http://www.sentencing-guidelines.gov.uk/docs/Assaultandotheroffences%20ConsultationguidelineFINAL-2007-06-21-JS.pdf
should you fancy a fairly dull read ;)
More generally, it's a strange one. I can't help feeling there's more to it than meets the eye though. For starters, cutting someone with a knife should be a straight GBH with a weapon charge - that's an instant 12-24 month sentence on its own. The fact this is apparently so far out of kilter makes it either amazingly wrong (possible) or we don't have the full facts as to how the case went.
I dealt with lots of cases where battered wives withdrew their police statements, and it's a nightmare; incredibly frustrating for the police, CPS and the courts.
Background definitely helps though, you're right. Not necessarily in an "old boys network" way though - educated people are much better at a) not dropping themselves in it, and b) saying the right things at the right time. Hell, even turning up to court in a suit makes a big difference IMO.
no subject
Pah! My friends list is best defined as "a bunch of smart people I can share ideas with and learn from", you know a lot more than me on this stuff, it wouldn't even have occured to me to look at sentencing guidelines let alone where they'd be.
So thank you. You're right, there must be circumstances the media scare story hasn't covered, but regardless I'm not happy he's been let off as lightly.
no subject
No need for thanks! I got out the habit of posting a bit recently, but I've still been really enjoying your blog. As oyu say, sharing ideas is where it's at :)
no subject
To have the court system then effectively dismiss it out of hand is normal, love. Which is why I never bothered reporting my ex. What's the point in going through all that just to get him a slap on the wrists?
A reminder: it was only 1974 when it became illegal for a man to rape his wife, and it was after that when the "rule of thumb" was withdrawn by case law.
no subject
The judiciary (and many leading lawyers) just haven't kept up with the massive changes in society (hell, you know this better than anyone), and that's worrying.
He should be inside, and because he's not, other cases similar won't get reported at all, which amkes things worse. I might do some more digging and see if there's more validity in causing a massive fuss about this specific case;
no subject
It might just be a case of a dumbass judge not looking at the sentencing guidelines. These things are rarer than one might think, but they do still happen.
no subject
My opinion? It looks like they have indeed disproven the "self-harming" crap, so that leaves "couldn't remember" or "talking bollocks". Let's be kind and assume that think he's not talking bollocks - where's the psychiatric evaluation followed by hospitalisation of a man who, by his own admission, can be extremely violent and have no recollection of it? Or maybe they're just hoping he'll take out the whole of his firm with a meat cleaver one day, then go for a pint and a burger because he doesn't remember doing it...
no subject
I wonder what planet the judge was on...
no subject
no subject
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=479353&in_page_id=1770
no subject