Chit Chat
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 56 comments are related to the topic:
SIXTEEN years for Gary Glitter
SIXTEEN years for Gary Glitter
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 56
|
By:
No surprise to see the Ghost of Jimmy Savillle aka Ebulgerry spouting his repugnant, creepy and hateful views of woman on a sex crime thread.
|
|
By:
I think the boy is resentful cos he aint getting enough,btw anyone who says he understands women is way off the mark
|
|
By:
Leaving that aside, it is worrying the judge bent the rules to effectively double the sentence. It's a bit like during the riots when kids got six months for stealing bottled water. If the judge thinks the law is wrong, he should write to his MP.
|
|
By:
How did he bend the rules?
|
|
By:
How did he bend the rules?
The judge made the sentences consecutive rather than, as would usually be the case, concurrent, thus effectively doubling the sentence. |
|
By:
Makes me smile
How can we get a bias jury Judge prob hated his music........................ |
|
By:
Sixteen Tonnes ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jIfu2A0ezq0
|
|
By:
Patently vindictive
alun2005 • February 28, 2015 5:47 PM GMT The compilers of various Registers are watching this thread with interest. You think I will be placed on the sex offenders register for posting on here? The way we are going it would not surprise me......as I said women rule in our society Still it is difficult to argue against the patent stupidity of modern men like babes to the slaughter I am afraid to say I am misogynistic I admit that...not surprising really...women have always stitched me up, be surprising if I thought otherwise I also see an awful lot of other men going the same way...decent blokes brought down by women I say it as I see it |
|
By:
that's the power of ................ fa nny!
|
|
By:
REPORTED
|
|
By:
lol I"ll pack me bags you bad b0llox
|
|
By:
socks first tel
|
|
By:
yes white socks packed
 |
|
By:
good man
|
|
By:
The judge made the sentences consecutive rather than, as would usually be the case, concurrent, thus effectively doubling the sentence. It' entirely up to the judge whether he does this and it's not at all unusual or bending the rules to do so when a person is found guilty of completely unrelated offences. If it was then it would lead to the absurd situation where the Crown would hardly ever prosecute unrelated offences on the same proceedings and just run 3 seperate trials against the person so the judge would be able to impose a seperate sentence at the end of each trial. |
|
By:
Never mind the even absurder notion that anyone who knows they already have comitted an offence meriting the maximum sentence can then get their 2nd, 3rd or 4th for free.
|
|
By:
slimy get deserves it
|