Can someone explain prison sentences to me?

jack presley

The reason I ask is because of John Gilligan getting another 6 months added on to his sentence for having a mobile phone. According to rte.ie his sentencing history is:

2001 - 20 year sentence for the drug charge (after appealing original 28 year sentence)
2002 - 2 years added on for threatening to kill prison officers
2011 - 8 months for having a mobile phone
2012 - 6 months for having a mobile phone

It then goes onto say that before today's 6 months, he was due for release in April next year. How does a 22 year, 8 month sentence end up being around 12 years? I've always heard of getting time off for good behaviour but surely being convicted of 3 offenses during your term cancels good behaviour entitlement?

coylemj

He was probably in custody for several months prior to the original sentence in which case the 20 years would have started from the date of his arrest and not the date he was sentenced.

It's standard practice to backdate a sentence if someone is on remand in custody for several months prior to the guilty verdict and sentencing,

PCPhoto

dont forget to take off the automatic 25% remission .... take 25% off each of the sentences from the date they were to start.


chances are some of the sentences might have been concurrent (not added to the original sentence - pointless in my opinion) and not consecutive (the new sentence starts after the original one ends).

I've always found it laughable when they get a 3 year sentence and it's all suspended. There's a serious flaw in our judicial system.

PCPhoto

Deleted User wrote: »

I've always found it laughable when they get a 3 year sentence and it's all suspended. There's a serious flaw in our judicial system.

only one ???


there are loads of flaws - but what do you expect when the country is run by criminals (not making any liablous comments about the government - its a reference to the lack of ability to stop criminals operating while in prison)\

- I mean how hard is it to block mobile phone reception inside a prison !!!!

EDIT: I have thrown my views on the criminal justice system on plenty of occasions - given that I work mainly in the courts I get to see firsthand the flaws in the system and my own personal opinions.

one thing I think should be introduced would be remove free legal aid and replace it with a subsidised legal aid..... if someone is in receipt of state benefits the fee for legal aid is taken at source - for each court appearance (I feel the solicitors on free legal aid push matters back and seek adjournments far too much)
- The idea behind it is ...... if the clients realise that this will cost them money for each appearance, they plea early and save the state money for a number of adjournments.

Another suggestion is that repeat criminals are not permitted to claim state benefits for a period of time - this has a two-fold :
1. it lowers pay-out of state payments
2. it forces criminals to do more crime -increasing their chances of getting caught and hopefully longer sentences off the streets.

I could go on and on but theres no point - its really for another thread.

coylemj

PCPhoto wrote: »

Another suggestion is that repeat criminals are not permitted to claim state benefits for a period of time - this has a two-fold :
1. it lowers pay-out of state payments
2. it forces criminals to do more crime -increasing their chances of getting caught and hopefully longer sentences off the streets.

Increasing crime as a matter of public policy has to be the daftest suggestion I've seen on boards for some time.

Based on the crime detection rate for burglaries, the recividist driven back to crime by having no social welfare income would need to commit about 5 or 6 burglaries before being caught, I hope it's your house and not mine!

Stripey Cat

Suspended sentences act as a threat- if the convicted person breaks the law during the period of suspension, then they know the sentence will kick in, and off to jail they will go.

I think the idea is that the threat of prison can sometimes be more effective than prison itself.

frank9901

what gets me is i see a headline something like "rapist gets 10 year in prison"
then at the very end of the story, the judge suspended the last 4 years of the sentence

daltonmd

jack presley wrote: »

The reason I ask is because of John Gilligan getting another 6 months added on to his sentence for having a mobile phone. According to rte.ie his sentencing history is:

2001 - 20 year sentence for the drug charge (after appealing original 28 year sentence)
2002 - 2 years added on for threatening to kill prison officers
2011 - 8 months for having a mobile phone
2012 - 6 months for having a mobile phone

It then goes onto say that before today's 6 months, he was due for release in April next year. How does a 22 year, 8 month sentence end up being around 12 years? I've always heard of getting time off for good behaviour but surely being convicted of 3 offenses during your term cancels good behaviour entitlement?

2001 - 28 years for drug charge, backdated to 1996 as he was in custody.
2003 - reduced by 8 years. Which means that it is calculated as 20 years minus 25% backdated to 1996.
Giving a release date of mid 2011 - he was then given a further 2 years(18 months) to begin after the initial 20 years in 2002 for threatening 2 officers bringing him up to April 2012. The 6 months adds 4 months so he'll be out in August.