Man sent back to prison for getting job that started too early in the morning

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Dabrazzo
a reply to: Vasa Croe

I think its fair to say you are genuinely just a bad person.

The fact he never followed up to make sure he was clear to work makes him a bit dim-witted as well.

He was given the all clear by his probation officer, he should not have to follow up with the prison governor, that's the probation officers job.

Well....that is where it is unclear. The report says the officer said to "go ahead", which to me could be interpreted as go ahead and ACCEPT the position, but we have to wait until final sign off for you to start, which is what the article infers later on saying "A spokesman for LCRC said Stansfield’s parole officer had signed off permission to accept the job but they were waiting for the governor of the jail he was released from to do the same. That permission had not come through before Stansfield started work, therefore he was in breach of his licence and taken to Pentonville prison."

I would think that these officers have these conversations quite often. If that is the case then likely the inmate was told of this stipulation prior to his accepting and starting work.

Trouble is, there is no other information available in this circumstance. Seeing that the report quotes one of the inmates friends, it would suggest that the family/friends of this guy were the ones that brought the story up in the first place as this would not really be a story of any significance to be vetted by a reporter unless they had nothing better to do....an inmate violates parole and gets locked up again....not really a headliner.

My thought is this is a case of the inmate being mistaken on what the parole officer said he could "go ahead" with.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: theNLBS

I have said it before, and I will likely as not have to say it many more times before I die.

When the Law does not serve the ends of Justice, then the Law becomes invalid in all the important senses of the word. Enforcing such Law as does not serve the ends of Justice, is itself unjust, and should be punished as readily as a breakage of the Law.

damn, is that you Thomas Paine?

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
Well, I hate to say it but I agree with the decision. Part of getting out of jail means having the ability to follow rules. While this may have been an oversight by one or more people, if the guy had not committed a crime in the first place he would not have to worry about breaking a parole law. It is the system telling the newly released to be responsible and follow the law as it is written. It appears, while he got his parole officer to sign off on it, that this was one step in the process and he did not follow through with the rest before accepting and going to his new job prior to when his curfew was set.

While it is a shame it happened, it would have been a VERY simple thing to avoid.

Sorry, don't agree with you a bit. That attitude is exactly why our prisons and jails are full of criminals who committed piss ant "crimes" and we're footing the exaggerated bills. If you and I were walking down town and I said "hey, you wanna cross here instead of at the cross walk, there's no traffic?" We just conspired to commit a crime whether we proceeded or not, albeit, not a serious one. He should have never been jailed in the first place. We don't need to waste tax dollars on prison, jail, probation/parole officers for this type of offense. People do dumb things, some of them serious, some not. His case does not warrant the penalties, either before or after he was released from prison. He should have been applauded for finding employment and his parole officer should have worked with him to accommodate his schedule.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

You do me too much honour Sir!

It is to my shame that I do not know the contents of Common Sense, only that he wrote the document, and many others besides, not to mention having been instrumental in the American, and the French Revolution. A busy lad for certain.

All I know is, that my position on Law and Justice, is that the balance between these has been skewed in favour of the lesser of those two concepts for far too long, and it must be addressed.

If that has an echo in the words of Thomas Paine, then all I can say is that he must have been a sterling fellow, and if I should meet him in the afterlife when my time comes, I shall surely offer him a pint of whatever he would like from the bar.

a reply to: TrueBrit

If you would like reading that inspires thought, Common Sense is an oustanding volume.

Thoreau is a personal favorite of mine. Walden is superb, but Civil Disobedience....that particular work has a very special place in my heart. Especially the opening paragraph.

On a side note, I have Common Sense in audio format (from when I was driving all over the state every week).

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

I have just begun reading Common Sense through one of the links I found at the bottom of a Wikipedia page. I fear this endeavour will do nothing to restrain my habit for archaic use of the English Language!

originally posted by: StoutBroux

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
Well, I hate to say it but I agree with the decision. Part of getting out of jail means having the ability to follow rules. While this may have been an oversight by one or more people, if the guy had not committed a crime in the first place he would not have to worry about breaking a parole law. It is the system telling the newly released to be responsible and follow the law as it is written. It appears, while he got his parole officer to sign off on it, that this was one step in the process and he did not follow through with the rest before accepting and going to his new job prior to when his curfew was set.

While it is a shame it happened, it would have been a VERY simple thing to avoid.

Sorry, don't agree with you a bit. That attitude is exactly why our prisons and jails are full of criminals who committed piss ant "crimes" and we're footing the exaggerated bills. If you and I were walking down town and I said "hey, you wanna cross here instead of at the cross walk, there's no traffic?" We just conspired to commit a crime whether we proceeded or not, albeit, not a serious one. He should have never been jailed in the first place. We don't need to waste tax dollars on prison, jail, probation/parole officers for this type of offense. People do dumb things, some of them serious, some not. His case does not warrant the penalties, either before or after he was released from prison. He should have been applauded for finding employment and his parole officer should have worked with him to accommodate his schedule.

I would say his sentence is more likely a plea to conspiring to theft. He likely committed the crime and cut a deal for a plea to a lesser sentence and ratted out someone else. Typically a charge of theft like that can't stick, so when it is seen it is usually a case of the person pleading to a lesser charge.

Either way, everyone is welcome to their own opinion and I always appreciate other points of view.

a reply to: theNLBS
18 months for conspiracy to steal a car? How does that work, do they have witnesses and maps and plans all drawn out on how they were going to steal a car? # most cars aren't even worth 18months of work, I know most of my cars I got from auctions, the first car I ever got was a 94 Toyota celica and I saved all summer plus some to pony up the 3k cash. The second was a jeep and I only got it because I needed a ride bad fast and it was cheep, and at that day they had cars older Honda models that you can get up and running with a few hundred bucks put into them and they were bidding for 500$. My car I drive now a Nissan pathfinder my parents bought it, after somebody swiped me in the jeep and basically snapped the axle off.

I mean when i think of Britain and cars i generally think of those little cars they drive around over there, but they must have tried to steal a Ferrari or something, 18 months is pretty dam long time. # if you can that much time for a conspiracy, that means I or anybody really could probably make plans to frame anybody I wanted and get them sent to jail if all it takes is evidence of a conspiracy. I mean so many holes in that part its just ridiculous.

But ya. 45 minutes curfew delay. Oh ya, we have a monster there. But hey you know I suppose its business in the UK as well, and by the time he gets out he will likely have to turn to crime to support himself, i dont think they will rehire him back at that delivery company either. Its all one giant circle.

Just another brick in the wall for the middle class, It is quite obvious by now the hammer is dropping and we are no longer allowed to earn a living once we cross that Rubicon.

Next will be firing squads for traffic tickets unpaid.

Regards, Iwinder

originally posted by: StoutBroux
Yep, pure BS. But, who gets 18 months for CONSPIRACY to steal a car? That's even more BS and he should have fired his attorney. I know of people who have ACTUALLY stolen a car and got less time. That man got double BS'd!

This. I like how some Europeans jump on n Americas nuts for our sentencing when it comes to drug dealers but then turn around and give a dude a year and a half for thinking about stealing a car. If that's the case, I'd be in jail for life.

God bless ATS, where "denying ignorance" doesn't actually extend to spending all of 20 seconds on Google.

www.ilfordrecor... der.co.uk/news/crime-court/ringleader_of_sophisticated_car_theft_scam_from_clayhall_jailed_1_2910480

A 35-year-old [Imran Khan Ganchi] has been sentenced to five years in prison after masterminding a car theft scam worth hundreds of thousands of pounds.
...
His accomplice Ashley Stanfield of Jack Walker Court, Finsbury Park was sentenced to three years in prison on the same charge. The pair stole seven cars, usually high end Mercedes, and made three further attempts on other vehicles.