Transsexual pervert who downloaded child porn is spared jail

Quote:

---

A transsexual who downloaded sickening images of child pornography escaped jail because a judge said prison would be too tough a place for her.

Laura Voyce, 20, who was born a man and used to go by the name Luke, faced being locked up for nine months in a male prison after being convicted of 14 counts of downloading indecent images of children.

Four of the images discovered on Voyce’s laptop were of level four, the second most serious, and featured semi-naked youngsters being abused.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz0tjxuI7tK

---

Great. :S The system is messed up, just say you're guilty but tell the judge you don't like prison and they won't send you down, simple! :rolleyes:

I think you have to be in court to really understand why but she does have a suspended sentence so will be under constant review. It's quite ironic really that the conservatives were supposed to 'lock em all up' now they are letting them all out and discouraging imprisonment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Catzsy

I think you have to be in court to really understand why but she does have a suspended sentence so will be under constant review. It's quite ironic really that the conservatives were supposed to 'lock em all up' now they are letting them all out and discouraging imprisonment.

---

Nobody should get special treatment... and if she's a transsexual doesn't that mean she's legally a woman? So she could go to a woman prison?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hitman

Nobody should get special treatment... and if she's a transsexual doesn't that mean she's legally a woman? So she could go to a woman prison?

---

It says she is in transition so I imagine it could have been a logistical nightmare. As I say it looks like the new policy being rolled out by the government.
Link:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...-falling-crime

I am quite amazed at this tbh.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Catzsy

It says she is in transition so I imagine it could have been a logistical nightmare. As I say it looks like the new policy being rolled out by the government.
Link:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...-falling-crime

I am quite amazed at this tbh.

---

Ugh I doubt it! If you don't lock people who commit crimes up then they are free on the streets to commit even more crimes... OK, so some people want them to go to rehab centres for criminals, maybe some will change but not all of them! Some people will just never learn and it's in the public's best interest to keep them off the streets and to prevent more crimes by locking them up.

Well where child pornography is concerned I am 100% with you because they are not going to be 'cured'. It is a very serious problem that doesn't have a lot of answers apart from locking them up in a secure environment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Catzsy

Well where child pornography is concerned I am 100% with you because they are not going to be 'cured'. It is a very serious problem that doesn't have a lot of answers apart from locking them up in a secure environment.

---

Yes I suppose so. I was more on the line of robbery and that, but still people don't learn... if people are let out of prison early or are not even sent down then what kind of message does that portray to the criminals? I am not a criminal, but if I knew there were lenient sentences or no sentences I'd be much more likely to commit a crime because I'd know the repercussions weren't going to be so harsh.

if she wouldnt stand it a) go to a female prison
b) keep constant supervision

maybe they should split prisons up into offense, well levels of offenses unles this is done already then it fails.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Catzsy

I think you have to be in court to really understand why but she does have a suspended sentence so will be under constant review. It's quite ironic really that the conservatives were supposed to 'lock em all up' now they are letting them all out and discouraging imprisonment.

---

Similar to how Labour released thousands of criminals on early-release schemes.

But hey, need I be proved more right on the fact the main three parties are practically the same.

i didn't read the article but don't some people do community service instead of jail? she should do this instead of nothing :S

(s)he was only facing nine months? What's going on there? =S

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moh

(s)he was only facing nine months? What's going on there? =S

---

It is British 'justice' - although many on here would claim the way to solve crime is to sit down and have a chat with these people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

Similar to how Labour released thousands of criminals on early-release schemes.

But hey, need I be proved more right on the fact the main three parties are practically the same.

---

Labour ended the early release scheme and was embarking on a huge prison building programme.
Link:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/20...prison-numbers

As sick as this crime was, and why on earth ANYONE would want to look at that anyway, I think nine months would of been fine.

She didn't take the photos, all she did was look at a few of them. As sick as doing that is, I don't think longer than nine months is necessary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Catzsy

Labour ended the early release scheme and was embarking on a huge prison building programme.
Link:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/20...prison-numbers

---

Do read the article and use some common sense;

'Rise of more than 1,000 in England and Wales six weeks after scheme was shelved by Labour heading into election'

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

Do read the article and use some common sense;

'Rise of more than 1,000 in England and Wales six weeks after scheme was shelved by Labour heading into election'

---

So it was announced?

Quote:

---

The Labour government has embarked on the biggest prison building programme in western Europe, aiming to take the number of places in the system to 96,000 by 2014.

---

Also what happened to the 715 refurbishment of the new schools which would have made millions in tax and kept the contruction industry going. Unemployment dropped from January to May so it was working. Watch it rise again and house prices are dropping again. You also do not need to be so rude.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Catzsy

So it was announced?

Also what happened to the 715 refurbishment of the new schools which would have made millions in tax and kept the contruction industry going. Unemployment dropped from January to May so it was working. Watch it rise again and house prices are dropping again. You also do not need to be so rude.

---

It was shelved due to the election, do read the article before linking me to it. Why was it shelved due to the election Rosie? why do you really think they shelved an unpopular policy just before an election? :rolleyes: you and millions more are so easily bought and taken for a mug by this lot time after time.

As for the schools rebuilding programme - that does not create anything in tax, it loses the government money. All state controlled industry and economies (socialism) used the method you are describing (government taking money and spending it) and it does not create any wealth, it only saps it. A government cannot create wealth, only private enterprise can. If you build something such as a school, it does not create wealth therefore generates no wealth. Schools are needed indeed, however at the moment we can not afford it thanks to the last government.

Despite the fact me telling you all this, you and many others will still go and vote in the party which created this mass of debt in the first place.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Catzsy

Also what happened to the 715 refurbishment of the new schools which would have made millions in tax and kept the contruction industry going. Unemployment dropped from January to May so it was working. Watch it rise again and house prices are dropping again. You also do not need to be so rude.

---

It would of made millions in tax yes, but it would also cost the government hundred of millions to build. There's no point keeping people employed for the hell of it, and like Dan has pointed out, it's the private sector which generates wealth, quite basic economics here. It would of also not improved the education system which is what it's all about anyway?

How would you cut the deficit? If you were in debt, would you spend and borrow your way out of debt? :P

By all means rip into the Conservatives for their U-Turn on Prisons but don't bring Labour into it, they have no high ground at all on the issue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

It was shelved due to the election, do read the article before linking me to it. Why was it shelved due to the election Rosie? why do you really think they shelved an unpopular policy just before an election? :rolleyes: you and millions more are so easily bought and taken for a mug by this lot time after time.

As for the schools rebuilding programme - that does not create anything in tax, it loses the government money. All state controlled industry and economies (socialism) used the method you are describing (government taking money and spending it) and it does not create any wealth, it only saps it. A government cannot create wealth, only private enterprise can. If you build something such as a school, it does not create wealth therefore generates no wealth. Schools are needed indeed, however at the moment we can not afford it thanks to the last government.


Again they didn't - the tories or UKIP would have done no better with a world wide recession. End of. We shall see who was right by the end of the year I suspect. Many leading economists agree that cutting public expenditure at this time is like committing suicide. Tell me they want to stop benefit cheats so how are they going to do this when they are cutting the staff?

Despite the fact me telling you all this, you and many others will still go and vote in the party which created this mass of debt in the first place.

---

Again they didn't - the tories would have done no better with a world wide recession. End of. We shall see who was right by the end of the year I suspect.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Catzsy

Again they didn't - the tories would have done no better with a world wide recession. End of. We shall see who was right by the end of the year I suspect.

---

Nothing to say on the prisons issue then?

As for government spending.. Labour created the large amount of debt because they did not cut spending and even before the recession, they were still spending what we as a nation did not have. I often also hear you and others of the Labourite variety praise Labours decade in office before the recession, was that a world wide boom then?

It cannot be both ways, either the boom and bust were both world wide or they both occured here and were caused by the government. It seems very strange to me that when we mention the bust its all the fault of everybody but the government - whereas with the boom beforehand, it as all the work of Gordon and co! - it can only be one, the UK economy during the past few decades has been a settled economy meaning that both have the same links to either the home government or the world economy at large - take your pick but you cannot chop and change to what suits your stance.

Labour did not cut spending, it is their fault we have such an enormous debt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

Nothing to say on the prisons issue then?

As for government spending.. Labour created the large amount of debt because they did not cut spending and even before the recession, they were still spending what we as a nation did not have. I often also hear you and others of the Labourite variety praise Labours decade in office before the recession, was that a world wide boom then?

It cannot be both ways, either the boom and bust were both world wide or they both occured here and were caused by the government. It seems very strange to me that when we mention the bust its all the fault of everybody but the government - whereas with the boom beforehand, it as all the work of Gordon and co! - it can only be one, the UK economy during the past few decades has been a settled economy meaning that both have the same links to either the home government or the world economy at large - take your pick but you cannot chop and change to what suits your stance.

Labour did not cut spending, it is their fault we have such an enormous debt.

---

So the world wide recession never happened?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Catzsy

So the world wide recession never happened?

---

I'm not disputing that is occured and i'd ask you to point out where I said or suggested that.

I said very clearly that it was Labour who created the debt due to not cutting spending in response to the recession which was world wide yes, just like the boom which occured before it - both world wide. Had Labour cut spending when the recession hit (or even before the recession as it needed it) then they would have done the correct thing, it would have stimulated the economy and created real jobs making Great Britain a hub of economic recovery.

This is where we hit socialism, because as I stated before; government cannot create wealth.

How is this any different from sending a gay man or woman to jail if she's physically a woman now?