Recently two drunken young men savagely bashed a complete stranger in an unprovoked street attack. They were arrested - and at a later date each was put before a different court. Both pleaded guilty - and here the story diverged !
The differing opinion of the two judges resulted in one receiving a longer gaol sentence than the other.
Now, the person with the longest sentence has appealed on the grounds that his sentence is excessive - and it has been reduced.
Both men were equally guilty of a common act, committed in company. Perhaps one had the good fortune to engage a more eloquent council to plead on his behalf - or perhaps the magistrate hearing the case just happened to be in a more benevolent mood that day.
What is amazing is that apparently there was no thought of appealing the lesser sentence - on the grounds that parity would be a fairer outcome if it was increased.
Obviously different sentencing for the same crime is wrong, but what is also wrong is the tendency for all such appeals to reduce rather than increase the time of imprisonment.
This brings no closure to the unfortunate victim !
No comments:
Post a Comment