Page 1 of 1

Ken Clarke...

Posted: 20 May 2011, 17:29
by grim_tales
When he made his comments about rape crimes ("some rapes are more serious than others")?, I think he could have phrased his words better but was he saying rape isnt a serious crime? Of course he wasn't. All rape is very serious but with every crime (not just rape of course) won't there be differing circumstances so they have to be judged differently.
If the crime happens to a child/young person, should the person who did it be punished more severely? To do that to anyone is disgusting but to do it to a child is even worse.
Punishment given out depends on a lot of things - who did it, who its done to, what history the perpetrator has. I dont think you can have a "one size fits all" notion for punishment, in some rape crimes there are beatings, or until death :( So not everything is the same.

Re: Ken Clarke...

Posted: 20 May 2011, 17:33
by Markgway
He just phrased his words poorly from what I gather... he clarified his thoughts on Question Time last night. Obviously there is a difference between date rape and aggravated rape (ie. at knifepoint) but clearly both are wrong and should be severly punished. I don't believe in this 50% discount Clarke was proposing. Criminals get short enough jail time as it is.

Re: Ken Clarke...

Posted: 20 May 2011, 17:38
by grim_tales
Wasnt 18 months the shortest sentence? That doesnt seem very long for such a severe crime.
I agree both date rape/aggrevated should both be punished severely.