IMO, considering the impact on his children and that it was a first offence, he should not have had a custodial sentence in the first place but a stiff community sentence.
Actually I think this would have been a better choice even disregarding the children, as they are more effective at reducing recidivism than short prison sentences during which no effective rehabilitation is possible.
I agree! Children aside, prison should be for violent crime! That way there might be more room for violent offenders and non-violent ones could be put to good use in the communities they've offended against!
And whilst I DO NOT think kids should suffer for the downfall of a parent, at the same time, I don't also think it should necessarily be used as an excuse against custodial sentences - albeit not for non-violent crimes....it goes back to the "actions have consequences" fact and that this dad obviously didn't think enough about the possible impact of his actions on his kids.....
i think it's really difficult to assess the levels of violence another person feels at having their home or workplace or leisure place tampered with....
i think the letting him out early to look after his kids gives him the chance to think about the impact on his family or whoever he was caught from invading... clearly he didn't spend much thought on that previously though he probs thought he would get away with it
GOD BLESS!
Peace and Love,
Home
Search
Calendar
Login
Register