Should have left her with the original 3 years sentence
Might have been the wrong thing to do but I think she ended up doing what any parent would imagine they’re capable of being faced with that kind of thing being revealed to them.
[deleted]
Dunno why this seems to be evolving into a man/woman type debate. I agree with the sentiment of innocent until proven guilty, but also understand the woman’s motive and actions. Any parent would understand them. But, the law being the law, she should then face the consequences of HER actions. Any extenuating circumstances would and should be considered during the trial.
> Sarah Sands was convicted of manslaughter, rather than murder, on the grounds she had lost control. She was jailed for three and a half years – but later saw the sentence increased to seven and a half years because it was ruled to be too lenient. Court of Appeal judges said she had done nothing to help Pleasted hadn’t called the emergency services.
Should’ve kept with the 3.5 year sentence. I’m not saying that homocide should be lawful but she killed somebody who was molesting her kids.
> He had 24 previous convictions for sex offending spanning three decades. His crimes had carried jail terms. But nobody in the area, including the local council that housed him, knew about his past.
Maybe if the justice system had done its job…
Tricky one this. Two wrongs don’t make a right, but she went to his flat armed and ready to use that knife. Murder is Murder at the end of the day, the mens rea and actus reus was there.
When she killed him he was only an accused abuser nothing was proven and nobody knew about his history. This woman is not a hero
If justice worked as it should she would not have had to resort to taking the law into her own hands. The son of a family friend was abused some years ago, destroyed the family, offender got a fairly lenient sentence and was then free to continue his life. There is a danger of being falsely accused, but when convicted there should be no way for offenders to change their name and disappear. She should have got 7yrs probation and a medal, not an increased sentence for doing the justice systems job for them.
Wearing a white top to go stab someone to death is it’s own form of bravery. Any blood you got on it would never come out.
Can people please stop bashing the court for doing its job.
Yes, the guy was a creep, but that’s no excuse to commit MURDER. The court was right to send her to prison. Also, remember a few things.
She went to his house WITH A KNIFE, meaning the murder was pre-planned. And she stabbed him multiple time. Meaning she clearly intended for him to die.
Also, he was due to be tried for his crime, and given his record, would have been found guilty. In fact, Sarah knew this, her reason for murder was so her kids wouldn’t have to testify in court, which is a pretty petty thing to get your knickers in a twist for.
In the end, she only did 4 years in prison (so the court was already pretty lenient on her). Also, she’s a woman anyway, so her “prison time” would have practically been Summer Camp for her. Unlike if it was a man, then his prison time would have actually been prison.
Deserved a medal not a prison sentence.
Failed by the justice system.
Fucked up thing is,if the paedo was found guilty he would have done less time.
Don’t support vigilantism, but at the end of the day, the courts should have had this piss stain erased from the world years ago with his rap sheet. There’s a point where the state is partially responsible for the rapes committed by serial offenders by allowing them into society.
13 comments
Should have left her with the original 3 years sentence
Might have been the wrong thing to do but I think she ended up doing what any parent would imagine they’re capable of being faced with that kind of thing being revealed to them.
[deleted]
Dunno why this seems to be evolving into a man/woman type debate. I agree with the sentiment of innocent until proven guilty, but also understand the woman’s motive and actions. Any parent would understand them. But, the law being the law, she should then face the consequences of HER actions. Any extenuating circumstances would and should be considered during the trial.
> Sarah Sands was convicted of manslaughter, rather than murder, on the grounds she had lost control. She was jailed for three and a half years – but later saw the sentence increased to seven and a half years because it was ruled to be too lenient. Court of Appeal judges said she had done nothing to help Pleasted hadn’t called the emergency services.
Should’ve kept with the 3.5 year sentence. I’m not saying that homocide should be lawful but she killed somebody who was molesting her kids.
> He had 24 previous convictions for sex offending spanning three decades. His crimes had carried jail terms. But nobody in the area, including the local council that housed him, knew about his past.
Maybe if the justice system had done its job…
Tricky one this. Two wrongs don’t make a right, but she went to his flat armed and ready to use that knife. Murder is Murder at the end of the day, the mens rea and actus reus was there.
When she killed him he was only an accused abuser nothing was proven and nobody knew about his history. This woman is not a hero
If justice worked as it should she would not have had to resort to taking the law into her own hands. The son of a family friend was abused some years ago, destroyed the family, offender got a fairly lenient sentence and was then free to continue his life. There is a danger of being falsely accused, but when convicted there should be no way for offenders to change their name and disappear. She should have got 7yrs probation and a medal, not an increased sentence for doing the justice systems job for them.
Wearing a white top to go stab someone to death is it’s own form of bravery. Any blood you got on it would never come out.
Can people please stop bashing the court for doing its job.
Yes, the guy was a creep, but that’s no excuse to commit MURDER. The court was right to send her to prison. Also, remember a few things.
She went to his house WITH A KNIFE, meaning the murder was pre-planned. And she stabbed him multiple time. Meaning she clearly intended for him to die.
Also, he was due to be tried for his crime, and given his record, would have been found guilty. In fact, Sarah knew this, her reason for murder was so her kids wouldn’t have to testify in court, which is a pretty petty thing to get your knickers in a twist for.
In the end, she only did 4 years in prison (so the court was already pretty lenient on her). Also, she’s a woman anyway, so her “prison time” would have practically been Summer Camp for her. Unlike if it was a man, then his prison time would have actually been prison.
Deserved a medal not a prison sentence.
Failed by the justice system.
Fucked up thing is,if the paedo was found guilty he would have done less time.
Don’t support vigilantism, but at the end of the day, the courts should have had this piss stain erased from the world years ago with his rap sheet. There’s a point where the state is partially responsible for the rapes committed by serial offenders by allowing them into society.