www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-11653189

So what we are saying that people who touch someone's bum or look at nasty photos get longer sentences than a man who KILLS another human being.

The last time I looked at the TEN COMMANDMENTS it said THOU SHALT NOT KILL ( and this surely is God's law and the main basic law that we should follow )

Yet our Governments legalise killing ( By War ) and our courts give 5 year sentences.

I would expect someone having Under Age Sex ( Like a 21 year old with their 15 year old girl or boy friend ) may get as many years as that......

This shows the problem with our Justice System.

It is based on MEDIA MORALITY as dealt by a combination of MURDOCH's PRESS and the BBC. Where Ian Huntley is the antichrist for killing 2 people - and where TONY BLAIR who ordered the deaths of TENS OF THOUSANDS ( not least the hundreds of UK soldiers ) can hob nob it with the Pope and get paid millions giving talks on peace LOL )

Our world is seriously screwed up.

True point BR,however this was not your typical murder.There was great provocation over a long period of time from this guy and his mates.In fact the guy was urinating through his letterbox when stabbed.Really more like manslaughter under duress than premeditated murder.

Still the rabid tabloids would give this guy a knighthood while castrating anybody with even a hint of false sexual allegation hanging over his head.

Totally agree BR.

There was a recent case of a "battered husband" who stabbed his wife to death after years of unhappy marriage. He got 5 and a bit I think. Now, while he seemed to deserve sympathy for his circumstances, he has nevertheless killed someone.

Other typical 5 year sentences might be for GBH where the injury causes permanent disfigurement, causing death by dangerous driving (level 2), certain types of armed robbery where injury is caused to the victim, and single occurences of rape. Guidelines can be found here www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/guidelines/...ines-to-download.htm

BR, didn't you post a link to a case a week or so ago about a young man given 10 years for allegedly having consensual sex with a few 15 year olds?

Something's really not right here.

I shouldn't judge by looks alone but after looking at his photo there is no way I would piss through his letterbox !!

Yes I posted about a guy who had some girlfriends aged around 15 and when they split up one of them went to the Police ( he was only around 19 years old ) and now at 21 years old I tihnk he got a sentence around the 10 year mark.

That is a very good comparison. How can someone having sex with their girlfriend deserve 10 years in jail - when this man ( with provocation ) killed another human being and got half that ?

I think that perhaps with Kids getting sexualised by the STATE - the Consent idea should be changed so that if someone aged 13 - 16 consents to sex the sentence is cut by 3/4. So that that guy would end up with around 2-3 year sentence. But even that is strange because Under Age Sex with a 15 year old carries a 2 year sentence. So I dont understand how this guy gets a 10 years sentence ? How can that be ?

The courts in the UK are sentencing in a crazy way. People who beat up pensioners walk out of the court with no Jail term - yet someone looking at a photo can end up in prison for 3 years.

There should be no jail terms for Indecent Photos. They should always be suspended sentences and community terms. What point is there in locking people up for looking at porn. I would BAN all porn myself - but if they allow it then why jail people for looking at it. They need to fine people as well - that would hit them harder than going in jail. Hit them where it hurts. If they use the net then ban them from having a PC for 5 or 10 years depending on the seriousness or life. Surely the aim should be to protect children and others ? not punishment for the tabloids !!!!!