[Closed] Huhne / Pryce sentencing

public flogging with Tesco Horseburgers

Huhne - 2 yrs
Pryce - 18 mths

I would give them a month in the same cell

9 months. Out in 6 weeks.

Known as "Bunk Muffin" before the end of the week.

6 months each for me.

12 months him, 6 months her

Talking to a barrister at the weekend and he reckoned 18 months (she might get more for pee'ing off the judge but the txt/tweets/calls with his son may be in her favour). I never realised that perverting the CofJ was such a big deal - apparently it is and they're going to get nailed.

18 months for him and for her 9 months - sounds like a pizza advert!

Both out in a matter of minutes if the justice system for people like this is anything to go by!

18 months each and they'll be out just in time to spark outrage and summer rioting!

Any bets on which one of them will discover God and write a book about it, as an attempt at redemption? My money's on Huhne as he seems like an utter **** so will follow comfortably in the footsteps of his ilk

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

Does everybody really think Huhne will get longer than Pryce? Surely the other way round, given guilty plea (even if it was rather late) vs. attempting to get off with a dodgy defence. Though Huhne probably also ee'ed off the judge with his attempts to get the charges thrown out before pleading guilty.

Just to balance it out then, 12 months him, 18 months her.

I would give them a month in the same cell

+1

Both naked and armed with gladiator gear. And of course live on webcam.

I still find it amazing that Vince Cable* was on the radio this morning saying that it was such a tragedy that a such a talented family had come to this.

Wonder if he'd be quite so sympathetic if it was one of the great unwashed who'd been caught asking his wife to take one for the team. Utter ****s the lot of them.

*other self-serving, hypocritical arseholes are available.

I never realised that perverting the CofJ was such a big deal - apparently it is and they're going to get nailed.

Yup, run someone over because you're on the phone. Slap on the wrist. Tell porkies to the state about speeding ticket it's prison.
Anything that involves stealing from those in power, or subverting their power will results in the big banhammer. State's got to keep the proles in place.

10 months Pryce, 6 months Huhne...

Interesting. Some googling indicates that the average sentance is 10 months. The maximum sentance is Life (we can but hope!!)

I find myself agreeing with this:

10 months Pryce, 6 months Huhne...

Anything that involves stealing from those in power, or subverting their power will results in the big banhammer. State's got to keep the proles in place.

So if you give an alibi to a murderer, you get punished "to keep the proles in place"?

Don't think so!
Perverting the course of justice is a serious offence because, if it wasn't, the justice system would collapse. Just because this is at the lower end of the seriousness scale, doesn't change the principle.

Anything that involves stealing from those in power, or subverting their power will results in the big banhammer.

Him - 13 months
Her - 15 months

lock them up in a cell for a month with Vince Cable - odious little man

Yup, run someone over because you're on the phone. Slap on the wrist. Tell porkies to the state about speeding ticket it's prison.

+1

It is quite a bizarre system.

Lying to the coppers is one thing.

"No officer I have no idea how fast I was going"

"I've never seen those drugs before" etc

But being caught in a lie and carrying on lying is when it gets serious.

Perjury and Perverting the Course of Justice seem to get more than their fair share of high profile individuals. Maybe they genuinely believe they are smart / rich enough to get off

EDIT: 12 months each

Anything that involves stealing from those in power, or subverting their power will results in the big banhammer. State's got to keep the proles in place.

TRUE that try insulting a mod. Folk with power like to use it Shocks. It will always be thus insult me insult a copper or a mod and it is not the same outcome. I Would also give her more just for her being so stupid to be so keen to get at him she did all this with such a shitty defence. A year each

Not bizarre at all (well only getting a fine for killing somebody whilst driving is, but that's another matter). As mentioned, this sort of thing has to be dealt with severely as if people get away with it the whole justice system comes crashing down. Would you think it so trivial if the pair of them were lying about who was driving the car when it hit and killed a cyclist, or where he was on the night his ex-wife was murdered?

They'll both have to get pretty hefty sentences if only to stop the courts and prisons becoming clogged by the thousands of partners who've done the same thing then split up acrimoniously.
I do feel she was put in a very difficult position by him originally filling the form in saying she was driving apparently without her knowledge.
14 months each.
He's a (dangerous) idiot for speeding but a bigger idiot for not realising that thousands of drivers are still allowed to drive by the courts when they reach the maximum number of points.

I do feel she was put in a very difficult position by him originally filling the form in saying she was driving apparently without her knowledge.

If you believe her!

If you believe her!

Which the jury (and at least some of the first jury) didn't.

18m her 12m him

Both: 120hrs Community service...............in Toxteth.
8 months apiece, in reality.

The beak has to give Huhne a reduction in sentence due to his guilty plea, however as he left it until the last second of the very last minute then the reduction is about 10% apparently 🙂

Part of the interest in this is the difference approach each has had in dealing with it neither of which will go down well:

She, has used a cohesion defence which didn’t work partly because she was the one scheming away that brought this to the fore and try to cover it up by lying that was then exposed.

He, at least he pled guilty although not before trying to swerve the whole thing with the kind of legal manoeuvring that John Grisham would be proud of. And it was his speeding that kicked it all of.

Oh, and the CPS want him to pay costs for the ~£100K "dicking around" when he was trying to get the case thrown out. 8)

She, has used a cohesion defence

18 months for her, 12 for him. They both need to be made an example of, too much leniency and there will be outrage. As already said the justice system has a good opportunity here to make a very bold statement to the rest of the population.

Seems to me she's tried to use the criminal justice system to exact revenge, talk about a woman scorned! She deserves everything she gets and more.

She should get longer than him for being a bitter bint.

From the "analysis" on the BBC website:

Perverting the course of justice can be committed in many different ways: concealing or destroying evidence, intimidating witnesses or, as in this case, lying to the police.

It is a common law offence - one created by judges and not by Parliament. It carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment. Although that is something of a historical hangover, it remains a very serious offence as it strikes at the heart of the criminal justice system.

In the most extreme cases, for instance, witness intimidation, sentences of up to 12 years have been handed down. Cases involving lying to avoid penalty points are regarded far less seriously, and jail sentences tend to be around six months.

That was the term given in a 2008 case to a man who falsely claimed that he had been driving a car involved in a crash, when his son had been driving. In 2011 a lorry driver received four months for asking a friend to take his points for speeding so he could avoid disqualification.

It's interesting (and reassuring IMO) to see that judges are quite harsh on PTCOJ crimes. Huhne obviously avoided a perjury charge by pleading guilty...so we'll have to wait and see if the judge takes this into account to reduce his sentence or not.

I suspect, they'll both get something similar...around 6 months. If there's a big difference between the sentences (and of course justice must be blind), especially if Pryce gets more, there will be uproar!

They both need to be made an example of

Thankfully, sentencing doesn't work like headteachers handing out detentions.

it seems the CPS are going for him on costs as he took court action to have the charge drop. £100k apparently, it would seem that there is a lesson here.

I'm going to plump for 20 months for her, 16 months for him.

If there's a big difference between the sentences (and of course justice must be blind), especially if Pryce gets more, there will be uproar!

If justice is blind, then Pryce must get more. If that provokes uproar, then an awful lot of people haven't understood the law.

If that provokes uproar, then an awful lot of people haven't understood the law.

Well done.

8 months for her, 12 for him is my guess.

If justice is blind, then Pryce must get more.

Because she is funny looking?

She should get longer than him for being a bitter bint.

...talk about a woman scorned!

Thankfully, sentencing doesn't work like headteachers handing out detentions.

but yeah IANAL

Huhne obviously avoided a perjury charge by pleading guilty

He would never have faced a perjury charge as you have to lie in court/under oath, what you say anywhere else is beside the point.

This thread should have been called "Sentencing: Name that Huhne." or "Sentencing: The Pryce is Right."
RM.

He would never have faced a perjury charge as you have to lie in court/under oath

If he'd have gone to court and denied it, and it was found that he was actually driving that day, then yes, he would have faced a perjury charge*. I'm guessing he knew that he was done for, especially with all the phone recordings and saved text messages, so he pleaded guilty.

what you say anywhere else is beside the point.

Indeed, so he didn't deny it in court.

*EDIT: Well, there'd be grounds for one...whether or not he'd be charged with it, I dunno.

For Huhne the Bell Tolls, shurely?

She should get longer than him for being a bitter bint.

Well if you're going to apply those principles, then surely he should get longer for being a ****!

He was mithering and badgering her to take his points for him at the same time he was knocking off his researcher. While obviously playing the spousal obligation card. That's about as hard-faced as it gets! (Typical politician!) I suppose that if that was you, you'd just shrug and chalk it down to experience, would you?

For Huhne the Bell Tolls, shurely?

Very good! If you're not writing headlines for the Sun Martin, then you've missed your true vocation in life 😀

Sorry if I upset your obviously sensitive side there D0NK, however if you're going to turn into the PC police at least use my quote in it's full context:

Seems to me she's tried to use the criminal justice system to exact revenge, talk about a woman scorned!

Edit: This bit I agree with though:

some of the seemingly arbitrary sentencing handed out it could be headteachers doing it, catch em on a good day a "sorry" and a genuine remorseful look will see you walk out but a bad day and there's hell to pay.

Very good! If you're not writing headlines for the Sun Martin, then you've missed your true vocation in life

I did actually have a brief interlude writing headlines for a local rag...

I can't imagine that Huhne one has been overlooked. It's too obvious.

**** it, cba

From @tomsymonds tweeting from the trial:

Edis: its not unfair to suggest that if #huhne had succeeded in halting case the course of justice would in fact have been further perverted

[i]Now costs being listed. CPS costs v Huhne - £79,014. CPS for Pryce: £38,544[/i]

interesting that costs for his case were higher despite no trial(s).

interesting that costs for his case were higher despite no trial(s).

I think that was down to him doing more to stop it coming to trial...so they're associated costs, not direct trial costs. They're properly going after him. 😀

EDIT:

tomsymonds ?@tomsymonds
Apologies - correction - additional police costs were £31,000 -- due to to attempts by #huhne to stay proceedings.

That's because of all the pre-trial legal wrangling by him attempting to get the case thrown out.

"acrimonious ex" is unrelated to the sex of the person, "a woman scorned" and "bitter bint" are.

Can I just check whether "bitter ex-wife" is OK?

Life on the Isle of Dogs in an

stylee

Though of far more concern is the slipping standards of BBC journos "awaiting to be sentenced" 🙄
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21737627

Can I just check whether "bitter ex-wife" is OK?

How about "understandably bitter ex-wife"?

I think that's a pleonasm, binners.

my bitter ex wife is not ok

HTH

this is a woman getting all nowty about a little thing like her partner cheating on her whilst getting her to front up for his wrongdoings.

Pryce's lawyer is currently playing the violin...

No, as I see things this is a person using the criminal justice system (at the tax payers probable expense) to try to exact revenge on her partner for cheating on her.

The sex of either party makes not a jot of difference to me and I don't see why it should to anyone.

Indeed, to counter the "bitter bint" stuff...her lawyer says:

When she courted the media, Pryce's "judgement was clouded by her grief" at marriage break-up, Knowles says

Do they have to do this mitigation thing? Seems to me that it's just another way of whining and wheedling out of taking responsibility for what they did. If I was the judge, I'd be inclined to take their mitigating pleas into account and increase their sentences for wasting time. And bill them it too.

IANAL, obviously

in some cases the mitigation is important in others it may just be pleading and scrapping the barell

Though of far more concern is the slipping standards of BBC journos "awaiting to be sentenced"

Clearly BBC journos read STW 8) though I'd have preferred "sentencing"

Blimey, can't the beak just get on with it and hand out the punishment?

I know that Huhne has been in parliament for a good few years now, but I reckon he's not looking forward to his next meeting with 'black rod'

Oh dear, the homophobic prison jokes have started...

if she's an acrimonious ex purely out for revenge then call her out on it but can we leave out the (perceived) blatant sexism please.

It's not sexism but fact and in answer to your question - no. Now what?

Oh dear, the homophobic prison jokes have started...

Par for the course once we've done the blatant sexism.

Do we wonder how you walk without your knuckles scrapping the floor?

It's not sexism

The word you used is - at least implied (given, and here I agree to some extent with FSF, it's not a word you'd use about a man, nor is there a direct equivalent). Probably best to leave it. Maybe you should try re-reading it, googling the words you used and have a think.

no idea junky lad, do we?

Blimey, can't the beak just get on with it and hand out the punishment?

+1, all this mitigation nonsense will take days...

Just hang them both now and be done with it.