How does he only get 8 months when Aitken gets 18?
I'm no fan of Aitken but it doesn't seem particularly fair that Huhne gets less than half his sentence for a similar level of deceit.
He'll only do 4 months. Derisory sentence.
Different case/facts, Aitken initiated under his own volition a libel case against the Guardian who then produced evidence to support their story, plus he dragged his daughters into it by causing them to lie in court which could have lead to their being jailed as well. This case was initiated by the CPS and Huhne pleaded guilty before it got to the trial stage, albeit only after it was clear that he was guilty, that most likely gave him a few months off.
As for a derisory sentence - this is about right in my opinion. The point has been made about perjury and both their careers and reputations are in ruins, plus there is a costs hearing to come.
I could be wrong, but I thought that only sentences of 12 months or more qualified for the early release scheme? If that's right, the Judge has considered that they will spend more time in gaol than if he had handed down sentences of, say, 15months. I suspect that the balance was quite interesting because Huhne should have got a little credit for his (albeit late) guilty plea, meaning the Judge thought he was slightly more culpable than her but she was "penalised" for her "not guily" plea.
I could be wrong, but I thought that only sentences of 12 months or more qualified for the early release scheme? If that's right, the Judge has considered that they will spend more time in gaol than if he had handed down sentences of, say, 15months. I suspect that the balance was quite interesting because Huhne should have got a little credit for his (albeit late) guilty plea, meaning the Judge thought he was slightly more culpable than her but she was "penalised" for her "not guily" plea.
dont think he deserves any credit for changing plea that late in the day,imagine he was advised to after costing the taxpayer a fortune already.got what he deserved.
I saw a reference to a disqualified driver who killed someone on the roads recently and got 12 months for it. That truly is a derisory sentence. Our legal system is a very bad joke.
I could be wrong, but I thought that only sentences of 12 months or more qualified for the early release scheme? If that's right, the Judge has considered that they will spend more time in gaol than if he had handed down sentences of, say, 15months. I suspect that the balance was quite interesting because Huhne should have got a little credit for his (albeit late) guilty plea, meaning the Judge thought he was slightly more culpable than her but she was "penalised" for her "not guily" plea.
BBC said that the judge knocked 10% off his sentence for pleading not guilty.
dont think he deserves any credit for changing plea that late in the day,imagine he was advised to after costing the taxpayer a fortune already.got what he deserved.
He got a 10% reduction for pleading guilty prior to the trial, but he only changed his plea when it was obvious that he was guilty.
I'm no legal specialist but has this chap just got 8 months for telling a lie about who was driving or have I missed something.
I suspect that there are couples up and down the country that do this all the time - especially where one of them is the major bread winner and the other one has a clear licence.
I'm not saying its right but compared to violent crimes that I'm led to believe are given similar sentences it does seem like a excessive punishment for, basically, telling a lie?
I know where you're coming from KHA I've been on 9 points in the past and was thinking of offloading if I received any more points.... Thankfully I've learnt to slow down and that they do have average speed cameras in motorway roadworks so I can't ignore the limits !
Although these sentences have acted as a deterrent to me cos I won't slip my points off elsewhere if I ever get too many
I'm no legal specialist but has this chap just got 8 months for telling a lie about who was driving or have I missed something.
I suspect that there are couples up and down the country that do this all the time - especially where one of them is the major bread winner and the other one has a clear licence.
I'm not saying its right but compared to violent crimes that I'm led to believe are given similar sentences it does seem like a excessive punishment for, basically, telling a lie?
You have a point people who are more of a danger to society don't go to prison and Hune and his ex are not. Ok they may be a bit arrogant but arrogance isn't a criminal offence. Now they will talk about over crowding in our prisons.
I think very heavy fines and very long hours of community service would have been a bettter sentence.
I'm no legal specialist but has this chap just got 8 months for telling a lie about who was driving or have I missed something.
I suspect that there are couples up and down the country that do this all the time - especially where one of them is the major bread winner and the other one has a clear licence.
I'm not saying its right but compared to violent crimes that I'm led to believe are given similar sentences it does seem like a excessive punishment for, basically, telling a lie?
Judges do not like "perverting the course of justice" in any of its guises. They will not and cannot let people off lightly - otherwise no one would have any respect for the due process of law in the courts. An important part of the sentence is not to do with the actual crime itself but to be a deterent to "encourage the others".
The irony of it all is that Huhne got banned from driving shortly afterwards anyway - for using a mobile! He clearly should consider whether he should ever get behind the wheel of a car again - he must be a totally incompetent driver.
The stupidity of this, is that he is a multimillionaire, and could afford to hire a chauffeured car. So losing his licence would not have been a diasaster for him. It was just arrogance that got the better of him and he deserves his sentence.
I'm no legal specialist but has this chap just got 8 months for telling a lie about who was driving or have I missed something.
I suspect that there are couples up and down the country that do this all the time - especially where one of them is the major bread winner and the other one has a clear licence.
I'm not saying its right but compared to violent crimes that I'm led to believe are given similar sentences it does seem like a excessive punishment for, basically, telling a lie?
Judges do not like "perverting the course of justice" in any of its guises. They will not and cannot let people off lightly - otherwise no one would have any respect for the due process of law in the courts. An important part of the sentence is not to do with the actual crime itself but to be a deterent to "encourage the others".
The irony of it all is that Huhne got banned from driving shortly afterwards anyway - for using a mobile! He clearly should consider whether he should ever get behind the wheel of a car again - he must be a totally incompetent driver.
Must be his eyesight if his choice of women is anything to go by. Left his munter of a wife for another tram smash.
Comments
I'm no fan of Aitken but it doesn't seem particularly fair that Huhne gets less than half his sentence for a similar level of deceit.
He'll only do 4 months. Derisory sentence.
Some politicians seem to make a career out of lies and deception.
Who can you trust?
As for a derisory sentence - this is about right in my opinion. The point has been made about perjury and both their careers and reputations are in ruins, plus there is a costs hearing to come.
I suspect that the balance was quite interesting because Huhne should have got a little credit for his (albeit late) guilty plea, meaning the Judge thought he was slightly more culpable than her but she was "penalised" for her "not guily" plea.
Equality. Whatever next.
He got a 10% reduction for pleading guilty prior to the trial, but he only changed his plea when it was obvious that he was guilty.
I suspect that there are couples up and down the country that do this all the time - especially where one of them is the major bread winner and the other one has a clear licence.
I'm not saying its right but compared to violent crimes that I'm led to believe are given similar sentences it does seem like a excessive punishment for, basically, telling a lie?
Although these sentences have acted as a deterrent to me cos I won't slip my points off elsewhere if I ever get too many
I think very heavy fines and very long hours of community service would have been a bettter sentence.
The irony of it all is that Huhne got banned from driving shortly afterwards anyway - for using a mobile! He clearly should consider whether he should ever get behind the wheel of a car again - he must be a totally incompetent driver.