Man convicted of sexual assault has 23 character references presented to court

There is quite a long running debate on the practice.

References would not be directly saying "we don't believe you" or "that the jury was wrong" but they are controversial.

Details are pretty disgusting, i wonder does the defence application to preserve his anonymity due to the effect it may have on his family have anything to do with the fact same family provided character references

Dead wrong.

a sentence is not handed down based on evidence of innocence or guilt— that’s the verdict that’s decided on before sentencing.

how a crime has impacted the victim absolutely should play a part in sentencing.

glad you’re not a judge then!

Are they not already publicly available? Probably a good reason for that so.

Re victim impact statements, if the victim is a deceased homeless person without anybody to give a statement, does that make the taking of the life any lesser, or the person worth less?

I know but easier to blacklist a business.

And presumably that's why the identity of those giving positive character references is not normally made publicly available?

Yes but if they are praising a criminal in order to get a reduced sentence imposed they should be. Their statement can result in someone being released in to the public earlier. They should be shown as supporting this.

Seems a bit simplistic.

For example, a guy steals €10k from his millionaire uncle. He does it because he doesn't believe the uncle will experience any hardship as a result.

Another guy steals €10k from his aging uncle who has little to his name but his pension. The thief steals the money knowing full well that his uncle cannot afford to lose it and will experience severe hardship as a result.

Do you feel like this is the same crime? Do you feel like both should be punished equally? And if so, do you think both offenders will be equally rehabilitated by it?

Intent is key when it comes to sentencing. And in that victim impact statements have a place. In lieu of character references, I feel like giving the offender an opportunity to make a statement could be of benefit.

I think the above is a really warped way of looking at crime and punishment. It’s too emotional, too lenient, too “soft” on a criminal. How did it get this way?

Of course the thief will always think that they are hard done by in life and that the wealthier person can afford to lose out to them by way of theft!! That’s not the point. The point is to send out a clear message that stealing is wrong. That’s it. If you are going to start looking into the thieves’ thought processes in order to look differently at their intent… I just find that disturbing, really. Do you apply that to rape, as well? Shur, the girl has had sex many times already, your honour, why would I not have any right to some of the same? Yes, I can see she’s very upset all right, but doesn’t my honest intent matter here? I wouldn’t have done it to a girl who’d never had sex, I know she would be more traumatised. See how honourable my thought process is! Got to give me some leniency for that!

It’s ridiculous.

ETA: the millionaire in your story may be a thousand times more upset and feel violated about having that sum of money stolen than a poorer man might be. So there’s that about victim impact statements.

Utterly Bizzare and actually quite disturbing, 23 character References 😳

Whilst off topic it's Almost as bizzare as the story that Broke over the weekend re Midlands prison.

What the he'll is going on 😳

and how do they assess that impact without reference to the victim themselves?