Thread: Wtf

first of all sidney lets face a coupla facts about your beloved law ok.
No1-the westminster system is an adverserial system ,and as has often been proven open to manipulation and abuse.
no2 -the arean of judicial process is an artificial one for gods sakes.with the absolute plethora of legislation ocvering every minute factor about the process ,what actually goes into proving a case is in all probablitiy a fraction of what in essence is the ungarnished truth ;what exactly went on at that very point in time of the act being committed ,what is relevant to the setting of the actions.
Part of our forensic rehab process is getting those placed in psych hosptial to do violence prevention groupwork and individually offence chain work.this is often very painful andat least uncomfortable.In the words of one of my residents recently-"why the fuuck has it taken me so long to realise what I put people through."his actions -Obviously i cannot say due to privacy but hes well and truly up there in shagnasty rankings.
yeah the victims suffer from the moment of the offence ,but the offender ,dependent on circumstances and moreso attitude ,may well go through like with "so what " or the mispent adulation of dysfunctional peer groups commonly referred to as "staunch"
the work done by the offender ipsofacto is often never communicated to the victims due to legal process imposed barriers,mostly to do with the protective factor ,or usually the victims whanau wishing to forget the trauma., let alone the malfunctioning DNA sample who caused it.

We aren't talking cross purposes here, and I don't pretend that the application of the law is rehabilitive very often. Nor do I pretend that any system is perfect, but in my considered opinion, this one ain't as bad as I was expecting it to be.. everything is artificial if humans create it.....

Of course I see value in the sort of work you are doing. The issues I have and was referring to are around an emotive response to sentencing, driven by victim perceptions. That is a can of worms with potentially very negative outcomes...

The lock em up and throw away the key approach is simple, satisfying at a rudimentary level and actually doesn't solve the problem... we have a ways to go to get to the american level of failure in that regard, but we are in second place....

Originally Posted by Sidney

The issues I have and was referring to are around an emotive response to sentencing, driven by victim perceptions. That is a can of worms with potentially very negative outcomes...

If this requirement is not addressed then there are very major negative outcomes. At the moment it is skewed far too far towards the favour of the perpetrator with little regard to the victims. As you said earlier that all things must be weighed up, that means all things including the victims expectations.