Sgt Danny Nightingale

I try to express my opinions, such as they are, and I try to justify them. I also try to encourage other people to express their own views, whatever they may be, so they can be exposed to scrutiny too. Sometimes some of us may even learn something from the exchanges. I love debates and exchanges of views. I really can't understand why you would have a problem with that - so run it past me again, just what are you complaining about?

 

But defence counsel don't need to prove their client is innocent - they only have to prevent the prosecution proving he is guilty.

 

I expect in your vast experience you have heard of a well known expression that involves the use of the words 'kettle'; 'black' and 'pot'???


Oh, and where do I 'keep on asserting that court procedures need changing'.........as far as I can recall I have only hinted at it once.........which is hardly 'keep on'.

If trying to assist other forum members makes me a troll, then I'm not sure exactly what that makes you, sitting there ready to jump in to correct people who comment on a topic that you posted in the first place and obviously know a bit about..........if not trolling, then its simply showing off.

Come on Pete, catch up mate.

 

If I may, what I meant was that defendants can and do walk away from court free men when all the evidence is stacked against them due to some technicality, as do people who get sent down who are innocent. There also cases where by the judge has to my and others in society under sentenced the guilty, stuart Hall etc; and I have personal experience of this with Child Sex Offenders that have posed a tremendous risk to society and children, that have walked away with a minimum tariff, much to my frustration and then gone on to re-offend. Therefore I believe that the criminal justice system fails on a regular basis and occasionally it is verging on the ridiculous. Al has made some very valid points, and I don't intend to continue to have to justify my position with somebody that is obviously out to argue for the sake of an argument. I have many years of experience putting defendants before the court, I also speak to my cousin who is a barrister (her husband is a judge) and her viewpoint is that even if they believe somebody may be guilty they will do all within their power to attack the prosecution and Police procedures as this tends to be how they can win a case. No doubt somebody will have a response that attacks my personal views, no doubt they will come back again to show how incredibly articulate and intelligent you are, and that the rest of us are mere plebs. Fill your boots.

 

also having experience of putting people before court in a previous life I also agree with your sentiments.
from personal experience stories I could tell of how judges get it wrong border on the ridiculous

 

Hear hear.we still one of the best legal services if not the best in the world.

 

I bet Derek Bentley wouldn't agree with you there.........

......or Stefan Kiszko, or Sally Clarke, or Barry George and many more.......(lucky for them hanging had been done away with).....

AL

 

+1

 

Have just found this, i think it makes interesting reading, and much of which has been said on this thread.

Sgt Danny Nightingale | Adrian Weale

 

I am still in the dark how Plod came to know that Dan N had the weapon...........


Plus the fact that he appears to have been nobbled before for having unauthorised ammo (before his brain injury, I assume) infers to me that he was a serial offender and if he was collecting his own armoury, for what purpose....

 

Another great example on the news, where a judge has given a derisory sentence to a sexual predator. The judge described the 13 year old victim a 'predator' and the defendant was allowed to walk free.

 

Think it was a tip off from the ex. Wife. That's just rumour though.

 

I agree it's interesting reading, and makes several good points. Pity the writer spoils it with some factual errors.

 

It was the wife of Soldier N (the guy who shared the flat in Hereford with Danny Nightingale) who complained to the police that he had threatened to shoot her. The police searched the flat and found Soldier N's stash of weaponry. In the course of the search, they came across Danny Nightingale's separate firearms collection. Matters took their course from there, and they both got prosecuted.

 

In which case the minimum sentence should be 10 years (or is it seven?) because that comes under the section of aggravated possession of an illegal firearm and ammunition............so did he get off lightly or what?

Lightly...........Huh........hardly a smudge.

He should have been banged up good and proper......(soldier N I mean....Dan N didn't appear to have breached that particular level of offence)

 

Several....including the mimimum sentence of 5 years...

 

I would say that some kids younger than 13 are predators...............not necessarily sexual..........but certainly feral.....

 

I will not comment much on this case of a 13-yr-old "predator", I lack information plus the time and will to search it. I will however echo those commentators who say that you probably need to know why the barrister said what he did, instead of blindly condemning him in a knee-jerk fashion.

I have dealt with someone who was a victim of a ten-year-old "predator". There is no sexual aspect to the matter (before anyone starts frothing), it was purely a matter of an astonishingly conniving, vicious, cunning, unscrupulous and amoral "child" who made the life of a (pregnant female) friend of mine almost unbearable.

You can talk until you are blue in the face about a child not being responsible for its actions, it's the parents' fault, yadda yadda whatever, but when you are being abused by such a child, your options are limited. No one believes what you are saying and it is assumed that the adult holds all the cards. The fact is, when faced with such an adversary, you are in a world of hurt with no one who will help you.

 

Is this really a good idea?