Comment: Punishment does not fit the crime
It's hardly surprising that Ryan Thomas, who scarred a female police officer for life in a drunken brawl, was smirking as he left court yesterday.
He received 80 hours of community service and he was ordered to pay £500 as compensation to PC Gemma Maggs.
He also received an 18-week prison sentence but crucially, this was suspended for 12 months, meaning that this morning, he will wake up at his home in Horfield and he will be able to go about his business.
PC Maggs will wake up every day for the rest of her life to be reminded of the moment Thomas decided to take a swing at her, leaving her with a gaping wound from her forehead to her nose.
Thomas also has a a previous conviction for an attack on a woman, yet the magistrates felt it was not necessary to give him a custodial sentence.
And to make matters worse, rather than take responsibility for what he did, Thomas blamed the incident on the drink and on some story that allegations had been made against him.
In the meantime, at the same court yesterday, Lewey Spencer was given an identical amount of community service but a considerably more hefty fine for graffiti offences.
It is not being suggested that Spencer's punishment is too lenient – far from it – but it does seem to send out a remarkable message about how the courts view different crimes.
Justice is not just about punishing offenders. It is about reassuring the public that dangerous people will be taken off the streets.
For the second time in four years, Thomas has proved that he is dangerous. His sentence is not appropriate.
Comments
by sparko, south glos
Tuesday, June 16 2009, 1:02PM
“Every decent and honourable person walking the streets of Bristol and its suburbs should be alarmed, though not surprised, by the woefully inadequate sentence given to this thug.
People are sick to death of the way idiots like these, and even petty criminals who make people's lives a constant misery, are perpetually given raps on the wrists by judges who clearly aren't fit to be presiding over our welfare.
When will the authorities learn that if you threaten problem people with serious and worthy punishments, whether it be for punching police constables, so-called petty theft, or driving holding a mobile phone to your ear, it would save everyone time, money and inconvenience.
It's called issuing "deterrents", a word our magistrates don't appear to have heard of, or simply turn a blind eye to.
Basically it works like this - you warn individuals, through reasonable education in schools, youth clubs, prisons etc, that if they commit clear crimes against society, they will be made to pay for their actions. What's wrong with that?
This trend by our justice system to let criminals off the hook time and again with feeble sentencing is beyond me. Small wonder thugs like these are routinely seen walking out of court laughing in the faces of our judiciary while the rest of us are left gasping at the ineptitude of our authorities, and victims are left to lick their wounds because our arrogant and out-of-touch courts simply don't care.
Shame on you M'luds!”