Tag Archives: high wycombe two

Wednesday 20th January 2010 – I see that some kind of wiser counsels have prevailed.

One of the “High Wycombe Two” has been released on appeal. He’s had his sentence reduced to 12 months (which is still 12 months too long) but suspended for two years, which is two years too long too. His brother is still inside though, but his absolutely ridiculous 39 months has been reduced to a just-as-absurd two years.

But the final (at least in the short-term) words must go to Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Paul Stephenson. Now as you know if you have been following my outpourings for any length of time, there is no love lost between me and the Met, but I think that Stephenson’s words deserve full attention. He said that “people who put themselves in danger to tackle criminals should be celebrated as heroes. Courageous members of the public make our society worthwhile“. Now that statement is giving out a clear message to three groups of people – firstly the victims, who now seem (in Greater London anyway) to have some sort of licence from the police to beat villains to a pulp, secondly to the villains, that the victims are likely to beat them to a pulp with police encouragement, but thirdly, and most importantly, to the Judges. “Up yours, m’lud”.

In other news, I turned the place upside down this morning and found one of the missing papers. And so I went chaud-pied down to Pionsat to post my parcels of unwanted electrical goods. They are doing no good around here and I might shame the various suppliers into replacing them. It’s worth a try.

When I got back Liz called me and we had a mega-discussion about our forthcoming radio programmes. While she was on the phone Terry turned up – he’d been to Brico-Depot – and we had a chat about our future income-generating projects. And as I am in the middle of a culinary crisis (I’ve run out of vegan christmas cake) I tried my best to stimulate him into needing a helping hand round at his house. You never know – Liz might be baking!

Terry had also developed a flat tyre on his van so we had a tyre-changing session. He has 16″ wheels (Caliburn’s are 15″) and you’ve no idea how heavy they are. And I dunno who fastened his wheels on last time but I wouldn’t like to meet him up a dark alley late at night – it took a power bar and a long length of pipe to free the nuts off.

After Terry had gone I started work on the last bits of the studding for the false wall in the bedroom. And when it got too dark to work up there any more I glanced at the time – 17:58. Yes, the days are definitely lengthening.

And following my crowing about the weather last night, I was woken up at 04:00 this morning by a torrential rainstorm. Serve me right! But today was another good solar day and my batteries are fully-charged.

-7

Tuesday 19th January 2010 – This weather forecaster is absolutely astonishing!

Yes, he promised us rain today – a 90% chance with 14mm in the daytime and 10mm through the night. The current forecast however for this evening has changed slightly and we now have a 50% chance of rain and an estimated 3mm

And so what was the weather like today then? Why, it was glorious non-stop sunshine of course. So much so that the batteries are fully-charged again and I did a huge load of washing this morning. And while it was a-doing I started to look around the verandah for a paper that I’ve lost. That progressed into a full-scale tidy up and reorganisation in there that has lasted all day and still is nowhere near finished. Even so, there’s quite an improvement, even though the casual observer might not think so. And of course, I haven’t found the paper I was looking for that started all of this off. I need to find it as I have to go into Pionsat and I can’t go without this paper (well, I can but it makes the journey rather pointless).

And this evening’s weather? A brilliantly clear sky with thousands of stars.

And in other news, Rhys and I are well-known for our fundamental differences of opinion on American politics and the bearing of arms and the like, and we have long-since agreed to differ about this. But every now and again we find ourselves surprisingly arranged on the same side. And it’s with this in mind that I want to draw your attention to a legal case that has been hitting the news in the UK. A family comes home from their mosque and finds three men burgling their home. The family is captured and tied up while the burglary continues. As the burgalrs leave, the father of the family breaks free and grabs hold of his brother and the two of them chase the three villains. They catch up with one of them and hit him with a cricket bat to incapacitate him.

The burglar is tried and convicted and given a two-year supervision order. The two brothers, one of whom remember was tied up by the burglars and was forced to watch his family tied up, well they get prison sentences. And not just any ordinary prison sentences either but 30 and 39 months respectively.

Now that is not the part of the procedure that is obscene. The worst part of the whole affair is the judge’s comments. The burglars have committed a “serious and wicked offence” – and the sentence for that crime is probation. The judge goes on to say that “If persons were permitted to take the law into their own hands and inflict their own instant and violent punishment on an apprehended offender rather than letting justice take its course, then the rule of law and our system of criminal justice, which are the hallmarks of a civilised society, would collapse.“

So let’s talk about that. How many of the THREE offenders have been brought to justice? The answer is “jusr one”. And which one was it that was brought to justice? Why, the one that the victims hit with a cricket bat. If the victims had not hit him with a cricket bat it is likely that he would have made his getaway with his two colleagues and would never have been brought to justice at all.

And seeing as he was brought before justice, how come justice did not prevail upon him to disclose the names of his partners in crime? I suppose that this is justice in the UK taking its course. If I had been in charge of the trial it wouldn’t have been two years supervision it would have been five years inside. Three times five years is fifteen years and the criminal who had been captured would have to serve the lot if he wouldn’t disclose the names of his colleagues. Soon put a stop to the vow of Omerta, that would.

Of course, the irony of his comments seems to have sailed right over the head of the trial judge. Maybe someone should hit him with a cricket bat and knock some sense into him. But I feel that it would take more than that to knock some sense into the UK right now. I’m glad I don’t live there any more.

-3