|
|
Post by sealandender1 on Sept 16, 2024 11:35:36 GMT
🤓 Suppose he’ll get a very limited sentence.
Personally I’d give him the max 3 years!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by milnerisgod on Sept 16, 2024 11:51:23 GMT
🤓 Suppose he’ll get a very limited sentence. Personally I’d give him the max 3 years!!! Maximum of 12 months at Magistrates' Court, but I doubt he'll even get that. Edit - 6 months, suspended for 2 years, plus requirement to complete a sex offenders programme. |
|
|
|
Post by sealandender1 on Sept 16, 2024 11:59:27 GMT
Fuck me pink. Six months suspended. Judge assessed the nonce as medium risk. He knowingly was dealing with a convicted peadophile, said he has no memory of viewing any of the images. What a load of bollocks. Edwards’ life is in tatters; should have been given bird and let a few lags put his arse in to tatters.
Absolutely disgusting!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by milnerisgod on Sept 16, 2024 12:06:15 GMT
I don't get them taking into account that his life and career is in tatters. Obviously it is, but if that was your normal man on the street, their life would also be ruined, but wouldn't have millions to fall back on.
Edwards can move wherever he likes (conviction allowing) and stay hidden as much as possible for the rest of his days, rather than returning to his old community and having to get a job. He's also much more unlikely to be attacked when he's out and about and can afford security, should he need it - Surely this gives him an advantageous position, rather than give an excuse for leniency?
|
|
|
|
Post by sealandender1 on Sept 16, 2024 12:16:47 GMT
Totally agree MIG - The poor nonce has only got £3,000,000 to fall back on. He should have been made to squeal good style!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Matt on Sept 16, 2024 15:43:20 GMT
It's mad to think I could threaten the government on social media and get an actual sentence.
|
|
|
|
Post by welshrover on Sept 17, 2024 6:52:50 GMT
It's mad to think I could threaten the government on social media and get an actual sentence. Yes, I think once again the sentence is determined by who the perpetrator is. |
|
|
|
Post by Ian H Block on Sept 17, 2024 8:36:19 GMT
It's mad to think I could threaten the government on social media and get an actual sentence. Yes, I think once again the sentence is determined by who the perpetrator is. Not really true that. The guy who supplied all the images only got a suspended sentence himself and the turbo-nonce who used to inhabit this message board escaped a custodial despite having thousands of images of child abuse. |
|
|
|
Post by Lobster on Sept 17, 2024 8:45:53 GMT
Yes, I think once again the sentence is determined by who the perpetrator is. Not really true that. The guy who supplied all the images only got a suspended sentence himself and the turbo-nonce who used to inhabit this message board escaped a custodial despite having thousands of images of child abuse. Yeah, definitely an argument the sentences are too lenient, but not really that anyone is getting favourable treatment. Also, while not applicable in this case as it's clear he encouraged it, I find it a bit concerning that it's an offence to simply receive indecent images of children, whether you asked for them or not. I've heard stories of people who have seen indecent stuff and reported it, and the first thing the police have done is investigate them for watching or being in receipt of it. Seems unintelligent, and a huge deterrent against reporting it. |
|
