Some people will say that you can't judge a sentence handed down to a criminal unless you hear all the facts and mitigating factors. That's often very convenient when those saying it know that the facts can't be released because they are sealed to protect the victim.
I can see absolutely ZERO mitigating factors for someone sexually abusing a five year old child. I can see absolutely no way in hell there can be mitigating factors when that same offender sexually abuses the same baby again on a subsequent occasion.
How is it then that a judge thinks a 2.5year sentence is adequate for such a heinous act? What civilised society can justify that and accept such a weak sentence? Where is the protection for the most innocent of our society?Where is the deterrent?
The attorney-general needs to appeal this sentence as manifestly inadequate. If our current statutes/case law deem this to be an acceptable sentence, then clearly legislative change is required. 2.5years for sexually assaulting a 5yr old child on seperate occasions is not acceptable.
No comments:
Post a Comment