Chit Chat
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Brothers jailed for Facebook judge jibes
Last updated 26 Feb 2016, 16:11 GMT
Daniel and Samuel Sledden
The Sledden brothers posted comments online shortly after walking free from Burnley Crown Court
Two drug dealing brothers taken back to court for mocking a judge when she decided not to send them to prison have now been jailed for two years.
Daniel and Samuel Sledden mocked Judge Beverley Lunt on Facebook after admitting drug dealing charges.
Daniel, 27, posted within 90 minutes of leaving Burnley Crown Court, while Samuel, 22, made offensive remarks 40 minutes after he left the dock.
Judge Lunt said the pair had not "learned any responsibility".
The judge said: "The question I have to ask myself is this, 'if I had known their real feelings at being in court would I have accepted their remorse and contrition, and suspended the sentence?'. And the answer is of course not.
'No responsibility'
"Each of the posts indicate they have not changed at all. They have not taken on board anything or learned any responsibility."
Both men, from Accrington had admitted supplying cannabis from the family home in Hopwood Street between May and September 2014 and were initially given two-year jail sentences, suspended for two years.
Daniel Sledden used obscene language in a message he posted online and said he could not believe his luck at getting a suspended sentence.
It "beats the three year jail, yes pal", he wrote.
His brother also used profanity when celebrating: "What a day it's been Burnley Crown Court..nice two year suspended".
Earlier this month, Judge Lunt told the court she did not want to read the messages out which contained "offensive sexual elements".
BBC © 2016
Last updated 26 Feb 2016, 16:11 GMT
Daniel and Samuel Sledden
The Sledden brothers posted comments online shortly after walking free from Burnley Crown Court
Two drug dealing brothers taken back to court for mocking a judge when she decided not to send them to prison have now been jailed for two years.
Daniel and Samuel Sledden mocked Judge Beverley Lunt on Facebook after admitting drug dealing charges.
Daniel, 27, posted within 90 minutes of leaving Burnley Crown Court, while Samuel, 22, made offensive remarks 40 minutes after he left the dock.
Judge Lunt said the pair had not "learned any responsibility".
The judge said: "The question I have to ask myself is this, 'if I had known their real feelings at being in court would I have accepted their remorse and contrition, and suspended the sentence?'. And the answer is of course not.
'No responsibility'
"Each of the posts indicate they have not changed at all. They have not taken on board anything or learned any responsibility."
Both men, from Accrington had admitted supplying cannabis from the family home in Hopwood Street between May and September 2014 and were initially given two-year jail sentences, suspended for two years.
Daniel Sledden used obscene language in a message he posted online and said he could not believe his luck at getting a suspended sentence.
It "beats the three year jail, yes pal", he wrote.
His brother also used profanity when celebrating: "What a day it's been Burnley Crown Court..nice two year suspended".
Earlier this month, Judge Lunt told the court she did not want to read the messages out which contained "offensive sexual elements".
BBC © 2016
Show More
It also shows how thick the judge is to believe the drug dealers in the first place - showing remorse indeed.
As if these kinds of people are capable of remorse.
As if these kinds of people are capable of remorse.
Love this story. Two years to reflect on what a pair of utter idiots they are. Shame they didn't get a rec.
It also goes to show that the sentence you will receive for wrongdoing depends on how good an actor you are in court.
"Frapage Your Honour"
Like the old Not The Nine O'clock News sketch lol
Like the old Not The Nine O'clock News sketch lol
the judge is surely not a good enough judge of character to be able to carry on in her job.
.
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/feb/26/drug-dealing-brothers-jailed-after-mocking-judge-on-facebook
This article above claims that "the remarks were brought to the attention of the judge, after she had previously heard their expressions of remorse for offending".
If the defendants offered "expressions of remorse" in court (subsequently not accepted by the judge on account of the Facebook postings), has an act of perjury effectively taken place, requiring a further legal action?
One for the qualified legal eagles I suspect, rather than the admittedly excellent barrack-room lawyers of Chit Chat.
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/feb/26/drug-dealing-brothers-jailed-after-mocking-judge-on-facebook
This article above claims that "the remarks were brought to the attention of the judge, after she had previously heard their expressions of remorse for offending".
If the defendants offered "expressions of remorse" in court (subsequently not accepted by the judge on account of the Facebook postings), has an act of perjury effectively taken place, requiring a further legal action?
One for the qualified legal eagles I suspect, rather than the admittedly excellent barrack-room lawyers of Chit Chat.
It is not an act of perjury. Only untruths which affect the outcome of the trial count as perjury. Since their contrition is only heard after the verdict is decided, the outcome is unaffected and thus no act of perjury has been committed.
You're a hard man alun, isn't two years when they were about to serve no time enough for you?
You're a hard man alun, isn't two years when they were about to serve no time enough for you?
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539