So no exceptions..............unless there is an exception! you were close with the 1 year suspended Pete.....:Watching:
Seems the lack of respect for the. Court played a bigger part than the reps e t for the law or the victims. Diss the court, get more years. Arrogance personified
Good point. A sentence should not be increased on this basis - it is wrong in principle for a judge to sentence more severely because the defendant is insufficiently obsequious. Another reason for the Court of Appeal to reduce on appeal.
but i would put what that Barrister/part time judge lying bastid woman has done on an equal footing of being sufficiently obsequious towards the court and the laws of the land, personified in her case by the fact she really does know the rules of justice and chose to pervert them yet she got 18 months..ish is this looking after your own club member?
I never understood this country's passion for concurrent sentencing. It sounds just like buy one, get one free to me. Did a crime? Get two years! Did two crimes? Hey, it's two-for-one day today, get two years and two more for free! Or put another way: If you commit a serious crime, you will lose two years of your life to a prison sentence. If you commit two serious crimes, you will lose ... two years of your life to a prison sentence. Am I alone in thinking this is really screwy? Back to the topic: Is it all possible that the judge in the Clifford case ordered a very unusual series of consecutive sentences, knowing full well the the Court of Appeal will ratchet it down to concurrent sentencing, in hopes that Clifford would drop dead with shock? Wow, that would be petulance!
The smug twat got what he deserved, who gave him his PR advice about strutting around outside the court for 5 minutes before sentencing?
playing the game. right or wrong sounds like he will be out in a year. but his life is over. the bigger you are the further you fall. he will feel this harder than the average perv walking the street.
Whenever a convicted offender falls to be given custodial sentences for two or more offences, the judge has to consider whether the sentences should be concurrent, consecutive, or a mixture of the two. There are well-established principles for dealing with this problem. The "totality" principle is to set a sentence for each offence, consider adding them together consecutively, then consider how the totality of the sentence reflects the totality of the offending and all the other circumstances; adjustments are then made if required. In this Clifford case, the judge seems to have focused on subsequent changes to the sentencing regime, instead of confining himself to the sentencing regime as it existed at the time of the offending. He also seems to have been affected by the consideration that the definition of "rape" has changed greatly, and C might have been charged with rape if the offences had occurred recently. Both these matters are surely irrelevant to the issues which the judge had to decide yesterday.
if my auntie had a pair of nuts she would be my uncle.......... he also appears to have made a judgement based on the attitude of C at the court and during the trial rather than confining himself to the facts of the evidence presented........did he get found guilty of contempt of court or perverting the course of justice?
Remember what happened to me with my speeding case Pete? £200 fine; £200 costs; 6 points on a clean licence; for 41mph in a 30; all because I challenged the validity of the speed limit.....Serves them right I won on Appeal and they were hammered by the Judge; plus I got over £8K costs awarded to me.
I thought he'd do time and he will. Quite likely not enough time, as no doubt his lawyers will use all the arguments that Pete has raised. But at least he will go to clink. So at least, not a piss-boiling sentence. He really does appear to be a fully paid-up member of the arsehole club. Or just a member, in fact.
He is a slimy c...t who has benefitted from selling the Red Tops over exaggerated lies about anyone who he could 'out' in order to make quick buck. I have not met a single person who has liked him, I don't think he likes himself that's why he has been abusing you girls, classic sign of self loathing It came out in the trial that he has a micro dick (3' fully erect) the whole courtroom broke down in fits of laughter, the judge had to halt proceedings and take an emergency lunch break. The prison darlings won't be wanting the weener, but may sure take a liking to that tight ASS
I never really had an opinion on the guy until Louis Theroux did that programme with Simon Cowell. Cowell and Clifford set him up and tried to belittle and humiliate him. I thought then what a pair of horrible little twats. This was after Theroux had done the programme with Saville. I reckon they weren't happy about Theroux's treatment of their mate. It would be wonderful to see Cowell taken down by this kind of scandal but I don't think it's going to happen.
The court of appeal can increase sentences as well as reduce. As the Police and DPP are looking at new claims of additional Clifford's crimes they might find it's best to keep quiet. It would be that he could end up with a considerably longer sentence and we might never see him again. I'd be confident he won't be so disrespectful to the next court he finds himself in.
I can't believe that the other papers are really publishing that stuff about penis size. Is it a last ditch effort to humiliate him??
"Then an aspiring fashion model, she described how Mr Clifford allegedly locked the door, groped her and tried to make her perform oral sex on him. The court has previously heard claims that his penis is “tiny” and no more than two-and-a-half inches when erect. The woman, who is now 48, said in her evidence today that she thought Mr Clifford was well-endowed and his penis was very large. “I had only seen one before, I had never seen one in that proximity and that situation,” she said. When Richard Horwell QC, defending, asked her about the issue, the woman remarked: “I have a small mouth. I do, my dentist has always said…” This prompted laughter from the jury, which was sent out for a few minutes. Jurors returned to be told by judge Anthony Leonard QC: “It is inevitable in a case dealing with this sort of graphic detail that members of the jury want to burst out laughing." Max Clifford penis size evidence sees trial jury sent out for laughing - Crime - UK - The Independent Unbelievable?!
