Mother and former midwife escape jail over the female genital mutilation of two young sisters – despite being the first people in Australia found guilty of the horrific crime

    A mother convicted of genital mutilation of her daughters might escape jail.
    Justice Peter Johnson does not want the children punished by losing her.
    Former nurse Kubra Magennis, 72, may also escape jail because of her age.


Here's a judge who deserves jail-time himself for setting a precedent that's going to be used time and again by Defence Lawyers in future cases.

Despite the butchery committed being described as a 'horrific crime' - one of these knuckle-dragging 7th century neo-Neanderthal throw-backs avoids jail because her daughters need her (Hellooo .. ?) - and the other slack-jawed morón gets a reprieve from jail for reasons of age - even though she's a whole 23 years younger than Rolf Harris ...

link


It's PRECISELY because of stories like this one - year in, year out - with both those charged and the court judges and magistrates showing themselves to be in collusion with utter stupidity - that people like Donald Trump are seen by so many as a possible solution to this sort of abuse of commonsense.

But of course.


Quote:

All have been given minimum 11-month terms, but may never go to prison. They are on bail and will return to court on April 22 to learn whether they will serve their time in jail or via home detention. Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3498321/Mother-former-midwife-escape-jail-female-genital-mutilation-two-young-sisters.html#ixzz43Uc63QGI Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Somebody beat you to the troll, Herbie.

Inaccurate thread

Maybe you could find something new, on The Pickering Post? 

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 11:02am:

Somebody beat you to the troll, Herbie. Inaccurate thread Maybe you could find something new, on The Pickering Post?

They've got kids, so home detention would make much more sense than the state placing their kids in foster care for 11 months.

Their "punishment" is not the real issue here. The real issue is the legal precedent of a custodial sentence.

The children should LEARN why their mother is in JAIL ...

They should be ASKING why their mother is in jail ...

The mutilated girls whose future sex lives have been butchered by their knuckle-dragging MUSLIM mother should be asking WHY the Australian court describes what was done to them as being ... quote: "a horrible crime".

With the mother at home - the kids won't realise their mother has committed a ... quote: "horrible crime" .. because here they will see her doing everything she normally does ... the cooking, the TV, EVERYTHING.

The government makes laws to cover ... quote: 'horrible crimes' ... and then the liberal-progressive luvvies who infest our judiciary system REFUSE to act upon these laws.

Jail - and then deportation for this woman's entire extended family is the justice that would fit this .. quote: "horrible crime".

Thank god people like Donald Trump are beginning to show up as prospective politicians to replace the limp-wristed cowards we've had for the past few decades.

Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 12:10pm:

The government makes laws to cover ... quote: 'horrible crimes' ... and then the liberal-progressive luvvies who infest our judiciary system REFUSE to act upon these laws.

That's just not true, Herbie.

The mother has been charged, convicted, and sentenced.

Nobody has refused to act upon the law. Quite the opposite, in fact.

WHERE are the feminists in all of this?

WHY aren't they out on the streets screaming their heads off about this obscenity?

The rationale behind the butchery of these Muslim girls is that by rendering them incapable of sexual enjoyment they will remain loyal to their future husbands.

Muslims again.

Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 12:52pm:

WHERE are the feminists in all of this? WHY aren't they out on the streets screaming their heads off about this obscenity?

but it's all you have done.

Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 12:52pm:

WHERE are the feminists in all of this?

Here.

Karnal wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 11:39am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 11:02am: Somebody beat you to the troll, Herbie. Inaccurate thread Maybe you could find something new, on The Pickering Post?  They've got kids, so home detention would make much more sense than the state placing their kids in foster care for 11 months. Their "punishment" is not the real issue here. The real issue is the legal precedent of a custodial sentence.

Word on the street will be that for FGM there is no jail time.
The people who are likely to do FGM need things set out in very black and white term.
Cut the clit, don't pass Go.

Also, I have FIRST HAND knowledge of how women with children are used to commit certain kinds of crime because when caught they are given suspended or very light sentence.

GordyL wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 1:52pm:

Karnal wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 11:39am: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 11:02am: Somebody beat you to the troll, Herbie. Inaccurate thread Maybe you could find something new, on The Pickering Post?  They've got kids, so home detention would make much more sense than the state placing their kids in foster care for 11 months. Their "punishment" is not the real issue here. The real issue is the legal precedent of a custodial sentence. Word on the street will be that for FGM there is no jail time. The people who are likely to do FGM need things set out in very black and white term. Cut the clit, don't pass Go.

Do you believe that sending people to jail will stop others from committing the same offence?

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 1:56pm:

GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 1:52pm: Karnal wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 11:39am: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 11:02am: Somebody beat you to the troll, Herbie. Inaccurate thread Maybe you could find something new, on The Pickering Post?  They've got kids, so home detention would make much more sense than the state placing their kids in foster care for 11 months. Their "punishment" is not the real issue here. The real issue is the legal precedent of a custodial sentence. Word on the street will be that for FGM there is no jail time. The people who are likely to do FGM need things set out in very black and white term. Cut the clit, don't pass Go. Do you believe that sending people to jail will stop others from committing the same offence?

Prison isn't a 100% effective deterrent, but it does serve as a deterrent for some.

Do you believe it's no deterrent at all?

Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 12:10pm:

The children should LEARN why their mother is in JAIL ... They should be ASKING why their mother is in jail ... The mutilated girls whose future sex lives have been butchered by their knuckle-dragging MUSLIM mother should be asking WHY the Australian court describes what was done to them as being ... quote: "a horrible crime". With the mother at home - the kids won't realise their mother has committed a ... quote: "horrible crime" .. because here they will see her doing everything she normally does ... the cooking, the TV, EVERYTHING. The government makes laws to cover ... quote: 'horrible crimes' ... and then the liberal-progressive luvvies who infest our judiciary system REFUSE to act upon these laws. Jail - and then deportation for this woman's entire extended family is the justice that would fit this .. quote: "horrible crime". Thank god people like Donald Trump are beginning to show up as prospective politicians to replace the limp-wristed cowards we've had for the past few decades.

At the age of 7 or 8, I don't think the girls are capable of understanding why. I definitely think they should learn one day, and will.

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 1:56pm:

GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 1:52pm: Karnal wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 11:39am: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 11:02am: Somebody beat you to the troll, Herbie. Inaccurate thread Maybe you could find something new, on The Pickering Post?  They've got kids, so home detention would make much more sense than the state placing their kids in foster care for 11 months. Their "punishment" is not the real issue here. The real issue is the legal precedent of a custodial sentence. Word on the street will be that for FGM there is no jail time. The people who are likely to do FGM need things set out in very black and white term. Cut the clit, don't pass Go. Do you believe that sending people to jail will stop others from committing the same offence?

Sure. It says genital mutilation is a jailable offence. This carries more weight.

The main point of the sentencing in this case is how to prevent FGM. It's a test case. This is not common practice in Australia, but Australians see this as a barbaric practice that needs to be stopped.

Can't wait until they've decided on the sentence.

If the mum gets home detention, Greggy's going to send $20 to my favorite cause.

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 1:56pm:

Do you believe that sending people to jail will stop others from committing the same offence?

IT would no doubt give pause to those mothers who are contemplating butchering their daughters to realise that if caught they will spend many months away from their home and daughter.


Let me ask you one: Does NO jail-time send a message to the Muslim community that ONCE AGAIN Western courts are showing themselves to be peopled by weak, ineffectual, feminised judges and magistrates who see themselves far more as Welfare Workers than as instruments of the law? 

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 1:04pm:

Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 12:52pm: WHERE are the feminists in all of this? Here.

Where does it say they are feminists little pecca?

Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 2:11pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 1:56pm: Do you believe that sending people to jail will stop others from committing the same offence? IT would no doubt give pause to those mothers who are contemplating butchering their daughters to realise that if caught they will spend many months away from their home and daughter. Let me ask you one: Does NO jail-time send a message to the Muslim community that ONCE AGAIN Western courts are showing themselves to be peopled by weak, ineffectual, feminised judges and magistrates who see themselves far more as Welfare Workers than as instruments of the law?

Weak, feminized judges are not big fans of genital mutilation, Herbie.

And yes, I think a custodial sentence is quite appropriate in this case - with the limited info I have. 

Karnal wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 2:18pm:

Weak, feminized judges are not big fans of genital mutilation, Herbie. And yes, I think a custodial sentence is quite appropriate in this case - with the limited info I have.

Thank you.

It is an incredible abomination that small girls - (regardless of being 'Muslims') - are having their future enjoyment of sex denied them by a slice of the razor-blade.

That is a life-sentence. It's irreversible. It's like rendering these girls in such a way as they can only see in black-and-white for the rest of their lives - so they'll stay loyal to their husbands.

An example MUST be set of every mother who is caught and convicted of this heartless barbarity. 

Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 2:24pm:

Karnal wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 2:18pm: Weak, feminized judges are not big fans of genital mutilation, Herbie. And yes, I think a custodial sentence is quite appropriate in this case - with the limited info I have.  Thank you. It is an incredible abomination that small girls - (regardless of being 'Muslims') - are having their future enjoyment of sex denied them by a slice of the razor-blade. That is a life-sentence. It's irreversible. It's like rendering these girls in such a way as they can only see in black-and-white for the rest of their lives - so they'll stay loyal to their husbands. An example MUST be set of every mother who is caught and convicted of this heartless barbarity.

Agreed. And an example does seem to have been set.

I have no knowledge of how home detention works. How do you pay rent if you can't work? Who's allowed to visit? Can you run a business from home? How many sentences are converted to home detention?

If the welfare of the girls takes precedence, separating them from their parents may not be in their interests.

Karnal wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 2:42pm:

Agreed. And an example does seem to have been set. I have no knowledge of how home detention works.

DON'T GIVE ME THAT BULLSHIT.

Next poster, please.

Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 2:58pm:

Karnal wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 2:42pm: Agreed. And an example does seem to have been set. I have no knowledge of how home detention works. DON'T GIVE ME THAT BULLSHIT. Next poster, please.

An enlightened response, Herb. Have you ever thought of becoming a judge?

Quote:

If the welfare of the girls takes precedence, separating them from their parents may not be in their interests.

Or maybe it would be the best thing for them.

You've been dismissed, Karnal.

Next poster, please.

freediver wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 3:10pm:

Quote: If the welfare of the girls takes precedence, separating them from their parents may not be in their interests. Or maybe it would be the best thing for them.

Not if you know the out of home care system. The best they'd get is a different set of Muslim parents.

They'd most likely be separated, placed in multiple foster placements, changes of schools, and eventually end up in residential care and the juvenile justice system.

Even your typical Muslim would probably be a better option.

Why would there be multiple foster parents? Do they tend to give up on Muslim children?

Baronvonrort wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 2:14pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 1:04pm: Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 12:52pm: WHERE are the feminists in all of this? Here. Where does it say they are feminists little pecca?

You obviously don't understand what a feminist is.

Is anyone surprised? Anyone, anyone ... ?

Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 2:24pm:

An example MUST be set of every mother who is caught and convicted of this heartless barbarity.

Agreed.

And it has.

This mother has been given a sentence of 15 months imprisonment.

Did you miss that part, Herbie?

GordyL wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 2:08pm:

Can't wait until they've decided on the sentence.

The sentence has already been handed down: 15 months imprisonment.

If you had read the story, you would know that.

Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 2:24pm:

Karnal wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 2:18pm: Weak, feminized judges are not big fans of genital mutilation, Herbie. And yes, I think a custodial sentence is quite appropriate in this case - with the limited info I have.  Thank you. It is an incredible abomination that small girls - (regardless of being 'Muslims') - are having their future enjoyment of sex denied them by a slice of the razor-blade. That is a life-sentence. It's irreversible. It's like rendering these girls in such a way as they can only see in black-and-white for the rest of their lives - so they'll stay loyal to their husbands. An example MUST be set of every mother who is caught and convicted of this heartless barbarity.

An example has been set (if they're given HD) that for FGM, you don't go to jail.

The people who do FGM are unlikely to understand the nuances in sentencing and what HD means.
They will only understand the take home message.
FGM = no jail.

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 3:30pm:

GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 2:08pm: Can't wait until they've decided on the sentence. The sentence has already been handed down: 15 months imprisonment. If you had read the story, you would know that.

In which of out states fine institutions will they be spending their time?

Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 2:11pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 1:56pm: Do you believe that sending people to jail will stop others from committing the same offence? IT would no doubt give pause to those mothers who are contemplating butchering their daughters to realise that if caught they will spend many months away from their home and daughter.

It wouldn't stop them.

People who want to commit crimes don't think about what happens if they're caught (because most think that they never will be).

Several states in the US have the death penalty: do people still commit murder in those states?

Well Herbie, do they?

Think about it, and then think about how silly your "argument" is.

Once again, your (faux) outrage is based on bigotry & ignorance, as opposed to rational thought & justice.

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 3:29pm:

Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 2:24pm: An example MUST be set of every mother who is caught and convicted of this heartless barbarity.  Agreed. And it has. This mother has been given a sentence of 15 months imprisonment. Did you miss that part, Herbie?

Yes, but you must admit, Herbie did read the headline.

GordyL wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 3:32pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:30pm: GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 2:08pm: Can't wait until they've decided on the sentence. The sentence has already been handed down: 15 months imprisonment. If you had read the story, you would know that. In which of out states fine institutions will they be spending their time?

What makes you think that they have to go into a state institution?

They have been sentenced to 15 months imprisonment. No mention of a state institution.

Do I really need to explain this to you?

GordyL wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 3:30pm:

Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 2:24pm: Karnal wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 2:18pm: Weak, feminized judges are not big fans of genital mutilation, Herbie. And yes, I think a custodial sentence is quite appropriate in this case - with the limited info I have.  Thank you. It is an incredible abomination that small girls - (regardless of being 'Muslims') - are having their future enjoyment of sex denied them by a slice of the razor-blade. That is a life-sentence. It's irreversible. It's like rendering these girls in such a way as they can only see in black-and-white for the rest of their lives - so they'll stay loyal to their husbands. An example MUST be set of every mother who is caught and convicted of this heartless barbarity.  An example has been set (if they're given HD) that for FGM, you don't go to jail. The people who do FGM are unlikely to understand the nuances in sentencing and what HD means. They will only understand the take home message. FGM = no jail.

Yes, I'm wondering what home detention is myself.

Karnal wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 3:38pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:29pm: Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 2:24pm: An example MUST be set of every mother who is caught and convicted of this heartless barbarity.  Agreed. And it has. This mother has been given a sentence of 15 months imprisonment. Did you miss that part, Herbie? Yes, but you must admit, Herbie did read the headline.

And what a wonderful headline (lie) it is.

"Mother and former midwife escape jail over the female genital mutilation of two young sisters".

Followed by the truth, which is:

"A mother convicted of genital mutilation of her daughters might escape jail".


Dear o dear o dear.

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 3:38pm:

GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:32pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:30pm: GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 2:08pm: Can't wait until they've decided on the sentence. The sentence has already been handed down: 15 months imprisonment. If you had read the story, you would know that. In which of out states fine institutions will they be spending their time? What makes you think that they have to go into a state institution? They have been sentenced to 15 months imprisonment. No mention of a state institution. Do I really need to explain this to you?

So if you were convicted of an offense and sentenced to 12 months,  would you prefer custodial or home detention? 
:D :D :D :D :D

GordyL wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 3:43pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:38pm: GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:32pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:30pm: GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 2:08pm: Can't wait until they've decided on the sentence. The sentence has already been handed down: 15 months imprisonment. If you had read the story, you would know that. In which of out states fine institutions will they be spending their time? What makes you think that they have to go into a state institution? They have been sentenced to 15 months imprisonment. No mention of a state institution. Do I really need to explain this to you? So if you were convicted of an offense and sentenced to 12 months,  would you prefer custodial or home detention?

Anything but a prison.

Your point?

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 3:44pm:

GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:43pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:38pm: GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:32pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:30pm: GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 2:08pm: Can't wait until they've decided on the sentence. The sentence has already been handed down: 15 months imprisonment. If you had read the story, you would know that. In which of out states fine institutions will they be spending their time? What makes you think that they have to go into a state institution? They have been sentenced to 15 months imprisonment. No mention of a state institution. Do I really need to explain this to you? So if you were convicted of an offense and sentenced to 12 months,  would you prefer custodial or home detention?  Home detention. Your point?

Home detention is the softest option given to offenders and provides no deterrence to other offenders.

You do know that sentencing is partially made up of a deterrence factor, judges mention it all the time.

You know you live in a country full of do-gooders when you can get home detention for mutilating two little girls genitalia. Unbelievable.

Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 3:49pm:

You know you live in a country full of do-gooders when you can get home detention for mutilating two little girls genitalia. Unbelievable.

Funny how the judge spoke very harshly of the offenders and noted how serious the crimes were, and how all involved were unremorseful, then in the next breath referred them for home detention.

How bizarre.

GordyL wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 3:49pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:44pm: GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:43pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:38pm: GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:32pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:30pm: GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 2:08pm: Can't wait until they've decided on the sentence. The sentence has already been handed down: 15 months imprisonment. If you had read the story, you would know that. In which of out states fine institutions will they be spending their time? What makes you think that they have to go into a state institution? They have been sentenced to 15 months imprisonment. No mention of a state institution. Do I really need to explain this to you? So if you were convicted of an offense and sentenced to 12 months,  would you prefer custodial or home detention?  Home detention. Your point? Home detention is the softest option given to offenders.

Incorrect.

Have you ever heard of a suspended sentence?

GordyL wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 3:52pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:49pm: You know you live in a country full of do-gooders when you can get home detention for mutilating two little girls genitalia. Unbelievable. Funny how the judge spoke very harshly of the offenders and noted how serious the crimes were, and how all involved were unremorseful, then in the next breath referred them for home detention. How bizarre.

The same judge that sentenced them to 15 months imprisonment - is that the one you're talking about?

GordyL wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 3:52pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:49pm: You know you live in a country full of do-gooders when you can get home detention for mutilating two little girls genitalia. Unbelievable. Funny how the judge spoke very harshly of the offenders and noted how serious the crimes were, and how all involved were unremorseful, then in the next breath referred them for home detention. How bizarre.

The mother going to jail and leaving the kids became an issue. It's never an issue when other people go to jail and leave their kids. Very bizarre Gordy.

Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 3:55pm:

GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:52pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:49pm: You know you live in a country full of do-gooders when you can get home detention for mutilating two little girls genitalia. Unbelievable. Funny how the judge spoke very harshly of the offenders and noted how serious the crimes were, and how all involved were unremorseful, then in the next breath referred them for home detention. How bizarre. The mother going to jail and leaving the kids became an issue. It's never an issue when other people go to jail and leave their kids.

It's always an issue.

Where have you been?

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 3:55pm:

GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:52pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:49pm: You know you live in a country full of do-gooders when you can get home detention for mutilating two little girls genitalia. Unbelievable. Funny how the judge spoke very harshly of the offenders and noted how serious the crimes were, and how all involved were unremorseful, then in the next breath referred them for home detention. How bizarre. The same judge that sentenced them to 15 months imprisonment - is that the one you're talking about?

But NSW Supreme Court Justice Peter Johnson has referred the three to be assessed for home detention

Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 3:58pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:55pm: GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:52pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:49pm: You know you live in a country full of do-gooders when you can get home detention for mutilating two little girls genitalia. Unbelievable. Funny how the judge spoke very harshly of the offenders and noted how serious the crimes were, and how all involved were unremorseful, then in the next breath referred them for home detention. How bizarre. The same judge that sentenced them to 15 months imprisonment - is that the one you're talking about? But NSW Supreme Court Justice Peter Johnson has referred the three to be assessed for home detention

Yes.

Your point?

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 3:57pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:55pm: GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:52pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:49pm: You know you live in a country full of do-gooders when you can get home detention for mutilating two little girls genitalia. Unbelievable. Funny how the judge spoke very harshly of the offenders and noted how serious the crimes were, and how all involved were unremorseful, then in the next breath referred them for home detention. How bizarre. The mother going to jail and leaving the kids became an issue. It's never an issue when other people go to jail and leave their kids. It's always an issue. Where have you been?

So all those people woman in female prisons should have cut a clit off instead.

Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 3:59pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:57pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:55pm: GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:52pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:49pm: You know you live in a country full of do-gooders when you can get home detention for mutilating two little girls genitalia. Unbelievable. Funny how the judge spoke very harshly of the offenders and noted how serious the crimes were, and how all involved were unremorseful, then in the next breath referred them for home detention. How bizarre. The mother going to jail and leaving the kids became an issue. It's never an issue when other people go to jail and leave their kids. It's always an issue. Where have you been? So all those people woman in female prisons should have cut a clit off instead.

Answer yes or no, Homo.

Have these three been given home detention?

Yes, or no?

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 3:58pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:58pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:55pm: GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:52pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:49pm: You know you live in a country full of do-gooders when you can get home detention for mutilating two little girls genitalia. Unbelievable. Funny how the judge spoke very harshly of the offenders and noted how serious the crimes were, and how all involved were unremorseful, then in the next breath referred them for home detention. How bizarre. The same judge that sentenced them to 15 months imprisonment - is that the one you're talking about? But NSW Supreme Court Justice Peter Johnson has referred the three to be assessed for home detention Yes. Your point?

That means they'll get home detention numptoid. Home detention isn't imprisonment.

Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 4:00pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:58pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:58pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:55pm: GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:52pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:49pm: You know you live in a country full of do-gooders when you can get home detention for mutilating two little girls genitalia. Unbelievable. Funny how the judge spoke very harshly of the offenders and noted how serious the crimes were, and how all involved were unremorseful, then in the next breath referred them for home detention. How bizarre. The same judge that sentenced them to 15 months imprisonment - is that the one you're talking about? But NSW Supreme Court Justice Peter Johnson has referred the three to be assessed for home detention Yes. Your point? Home detention isn't imprisonment.

Of course it is.

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 4:00pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:59pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:57pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:55pm: GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:52pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:49pm: You know you live in a country full of do-gooders when you can get home detention for mutilating two little girls genitalia. Unbelievable. Funny how the judge spoke very harshly of the offenders and noted how serious the crimes were, and how all involved were unremorseful, then in the next breath referred them for home detention. How bizarre. The mother going to jail and leaving the kids became an issue. It's never an issue when other people go to jail and leave their kids. It's always an issue. Where have you been? So all those people woman in female prisons should have cut a clit off instead. Answer yes or no, Homo. Have these three been given home detention? Yes, or no?

Are they in "pound me in the ass" prison??

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 4:00pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 4:00pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:58pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:58pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:55pm: GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:52pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:49pm: You know you live in a country full of do-gooders when you can get home detention for mutilating two little girls genitalia. Unbelievable. Funny how the judge spoke very harshly of the offenders and noted how serious the crimes were, and how all involved were unremorseful, then in the next breath referred them for home detention. How bizarre. The same judge that sentenced them to 15 months imprisonment - is that the one you're talking about? But NSW Supreme Court Justice Peter Johnson has referred the three to be assessed for home detention Yes. Your point? Home detention isn't imprisonment. Of course it is.

So all those pensioners who never leave home are in prison then.  ;D ;D ;D

Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 4:01pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 4:00pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:59pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:57pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:55pm: GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:52pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:49pm: You know you live in a country full of do-gooders when you can get home detention for mutilating two little girls genitalia. Unbelievable. Funny how the judge spoke very harshly of the offenders and noted how serious the crimes were, and how all involved were unremorseful, then in the next breath referred them for home detention. How bizarre. The mother going to jail and leaving the kids became an issue. It's never an issue when other people go to jail and leave their kids. It's always an issue. Where have you been? So all those people woman in female prisons should have cut a clit off instead. Answer yes or no, Homo. Have these three been given home detention? Yes, or no? Are they in "pound me in the ass" prison??

Your white flag has been accepted.

Here's hoping you do better in the next debate.

Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 4:01pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 4:00pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:59pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:57pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:55pm: GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:52pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:49pm: You know you live in a country full of do-gooders when you can get home detention for mutilating two little girls genitalia. Unbelievable. Funny how the judge spoke very harshly of the offenders and noted how serious the crimes were, and how all involved were unremorseful, then in the next breath referred them for home detention. How bizarre. The mother going to jail and leaving the kids became an issue. It's never an issue when other people go to jail and leave their kids. It's always an issue. Where have you been? So all those people woman in female prisons should have cut a clit off instead. Answer yes or no, Homo. Have these three been given home detention? Yes, or no? Are they in "pound me in the ass" prison??

If she gets HD will they send vinager tits to her house to make her life miserable?

Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 4:02pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 4:00pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 4:00pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:58pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:58pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:55pm: GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:52pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:49pm: You know you live in a country full of do-gooders when you can get home detention for mutilating two little girls genitalia. Unbelievable. Funny how the judge spoke very harshly of the offenders and noted how serious the crimes were, and how all involved were unremorseful, then in the next breath referred them for home detention. How bizarre. The same judge that sentenced them to 15 months imprisonment - is that the one you're talking about? But NSW Supreme Court Justice Peter Johnson has referred the three to be assessed for home detention Yes. Your point? Home detention isn't imprisonment. Of course it is. So all those pensioners who never leave home are in prison then.  ;D ;D ;D

You're really getting confused now, Homo.

Home detention is a form of imprisonment.

These people have been sentenced to 15 months imprisonment.

Pensioners haven't been sentenced to a period of imprisonment, by a court of law.

Which part don't you understand?

I can walk you through it.

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 4:03pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 4:01pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 4:00pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:59pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:57pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:55pm: GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:52pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:49pm: You know you live in a country full of do-gooders when you can get home detention for mutilating two little girls genitalia. Unbelievable. Funny how the judge spoke very harshly of the offenders and noted how serious the crimes were, and how all involved were unremorseful, then in the next breath referred them for home detention. How bizarre. The mother going to jail and leaving the kids became an issue. It's never an issue when other people go to jail and leave their kids. It's always an issue. Where have you been? So all those people woman in female prisons should have cut a clit off instead. Answer yes or no, Homo. Have these three been given home detention? Yes, or no? Are they in "pound me in the ass" prison?? Your white flag has been accepted. Here's hoping you do better in the next debate.

Being in your own home. Nice lounge , TV and dvd player, fridge and freezer full of food, computer, no 7 foot tall negro in a pink tutu trying to cornhole you etc etc. That's not  punishment for giving 2 little girls permanent injuries. Farki ng softc o ck judge.

Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 3:55pm:

GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:52pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:49pm: You know you live in a country full of do-gooders when you can get home detention for mutilating two little girls genitalia. Unbelievable. Funny how the judge spoke very harshly of the offenders and noted how serious the crimes were, and how all involved were unremorseful, then in the next breath referred them for home detention. How bizarre. The mother going to jail and leaving the kids became an issue. It's never an issue when other people go to jail and leave their kids. Very bizarre Gordy.

It most certainly is. It's how all sentencing works for women with young kids.

Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 4:01pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 4:00pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:59pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:57pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:55pm: GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:52pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:49pm: You know you live in a country full of do-gooders when you can get home detention for mutilating two little girls genitalia. Unbelievable. Funny how the judge spoke very harshly of the offenders and noted how serious the crimes were, and how all involved were unremorseful, then in the next breath referred them for home detention. How bizarre. The mother going to jail and leaving the kids became an issue. It's never an issue when other people go to jail and leave their kids. It's always an issue. Where have you been? So all those people woman in female prisons should have cut a clit off instead. Answer yes or no, Homo. Have these three been given home detention? Yes, or no? Are they in "pound me in the ass" prison??

Miam miam.

Karnal wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 4:08pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:55pm: GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:52pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:49pm: You know you live in a country full of do-gooders when you can get home detention for mutilating two little girls genitalia. Unbelievable. Funny how the judge spoke very harshly of the offenders and noted how serious the crimes were, and how all involved were unremorseful, then in the next breath referred them for home detention. How bizarre. The mother going to jail and leaving the kids became an issue. It's never an issue when other people go to jail and leave their kids. Very bizarre Gordy. It most certainly is. It's how all sentencing works for women with young kids.

I though you'd side with a trio of muslim mutilators. You've probably had your own clit cut off.

Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 4:10pm:

Karnal wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 4:08pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:55pm: GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:52pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:49pm: You know you live in a country full of do-gooders when you can get home detention for mutilating two little girls genitalia. Unbelievable. Funny how the judge spoke very harshly of the offenders and noted how serious the crimes were, and how all involved were unremorseful, then in the next breath referred them for home detention. How bizarre. The mother going to jail and leaving the kids became an issue. It's never an issue when other people go to jail and leave their kids. Very bizarre Gordy. It most certainly is. It's how all sentencing works for women with young kids. I though you'd side with a trio of muslim mutilators. You've probably had your own clit cut off.

You're right, dear. I have no clit.

Do you know anyone who's done home detention? I've met plenty who've done jail time. How long has home detention been around?

Greggy, crims fist pump when they get to serve their sentence as home detention. Wheb they get suspended sentence they think they git away with the crime.

Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 4:10pm:

Karnal wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 4:08pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:55pm: GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:52pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:49pm: You know you live in a country full of do-gooders when you can get home detention for mutilating two little girls genitalia. Unbelievable. Funny how the judge spoke very harshly of the offenders and noted how serious the crimes were, and how all involved were unremorseful, then in the next breath referred them for home detention. How bizarre. The mother going to jail and leaving the kids became an issue. It's never an issue when other people go to jail and leave their kids. Very bizarre Gordy. It most certainly is. It's how all sentencing works for women with young kids. I though you'd side with a trio of muslim mutilators.

Explaining how the laws works to ignorant bigots is not the same as siding with Muslim mutilators.

Nobody here is saying that the sentence of 15 months imprisonment is inappropriate, or that it should be a suspended sentence.

You always let your emotions get in the way of the facts, Homo.

Why is that?

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 4:14pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 4:10pm: Karnal wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 4:08pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:55pm: GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:52pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:49pm: You know you live in a country full of do-gooders when you can get home detention for mutilating two little girls genitalia. Unbelievable. Funny how the judge spoke very harshly of the offenders and noted how serious the crimes were, and how all involved were unremorseful, then in the next breath referred them for home detention. How bizarre. The mother going to jail and leaving the kids became an issue. It's never an issue when other people go to jail and leave their kids. Very bizarre Gordy. It most certainly is. It's how all sentencing works for women with young kids. I though you'd side with a trio of muslim mutilators. Explaining how the laws works to ignorant bigots is not the same as siding with Muslim mutilators. Nobody here is saying that the sentence of 15 months imprisonment is inappropriate, or that it should be a suspended sentence. You always let your emotions get in the way of the facts, Homo. Why is that?

You are your typical minority apologist pecca. If it was a 'bogan" who cut some clits off you'd being banging on about jail time. It's funny how you never asked why DOCS didn't take the kids away? That's happened for less than cutting clits off.

Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 4:18pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 4:14pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 4:10pm: Karnal wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 4:08pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:55pm: GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:52pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:49pm: You know you live in a country full of do-gooders when you can get home detention for mutilating two little girls genitalia. Unbelievable. Funny how the judge spoke very harshly of the offenders and noted how serious the crimes were, and how all involved were unremorseful, then in the next breath referred them for home detention. How bizarre. The mother going to jail and leaving the kids became an issue. It's never an issue when other people go to jail and leave their kids. Very bizarre Gordy. It most certainly is. It's how all sentencing works for women with young kids. I though you'd side with a trio of muslim mutilators. Explaining how the laws works to ignorant bigots is not the same as siding with Muslim mutilators. Nobody here is saying that the sentence of 15 months imprisonment is inappropriate, or that it should be a suspended sentence. You always let your emotions get in the way of the facts, Homo. Why is that? You are your typical minority apologist pecca. If it was a 'bogan" who cut some clits off you'd being banging on about jail time. It's funny how you never asked why DOCS didn't take the kids away? That's happened for less than cutting clits off.

Once again, nobody is making apologies for these three criminals.

My very first comment on the subject was:

"Nasty business, that I don't condone in any way." See for yourself, Homo.

Nobody is saying that the sentence of 15 months imprisonment is inappropriate, or that it should be a suspended sentence.

Nobody is defending these crimes in any way at all.

You seem to be hallucinating.

Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 4:18pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 4:14pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 4:10pm: Karnal wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 4:08pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:55pm: GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:52pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:49pm: You know you live in a country full of do-gooders when you can get home detention for mutilating two little girls genitalia. Unbelievable. Funny how the judge spoke very harshly of the offenders and noted how serious the crimes were, and how all involved were unremorseful, then in the next breath referred them for home detention. How bizarre. The mother going to jail and leaving the kids became an issue. It's never an issue when other people go to jail and leave their kids. Very bizarre Gordy. It most certainly is. It's how all sentencing works for women with young kids. I though you'd side with a trio of muslim mutilators. Explaining how the laws works to ignorant bigots is not the same as siding with Muslim mutilators. Nobody here is saying that the sentence of 15 months imprisonment is inappropriate, or that it should be a suspended sentence. You always let your emotions get in the way of the facts, Homo. Why is that? You are your typical minority apologist pecca. If it was a 'bogan" who cut some clits off you'd being banging on about jail time. It's funny how you never asked why DOCS didn't take the kids away? That's happened for less than cutting clits off.

Sorry, Homo, what does a "bogan" have to do with this?

Are you suggesting this sentence has something to do with ethnicity?

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 4:14pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 4:10pm: Karnal wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 4:08pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:55pm: GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:52pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:49pm: You know you live in a country full of do-gooders when you can get home detention for mutilating two little girls genitalia. Unbelievable. Funny how the judge spoke very harshly of the offenders and noted how serious the crimes were, and how all involved were unremorseful, then in the next breath referred them for home detention. How bizarre. The mother going to jail and leaving the kids became an issue. It's never an issue when other people go to jail and leave their kids. Very bizarre Gordy. It most certainly is. It's how all sentencing works for women with young kids. I though you'd side with a trio of muslim mutilators. Explaining how the laws works to ignorant bigots is not the same as siding with Muslim mutilators. Nobody here is saying that the sentence of 15 months imprisonment is inappropriate, or that it should be a suspended sentence. You always let your emotions get in the way of the facts, Homo. Why is that?

So we have a bunch of people here  who have prempted anger at the almost enevidible sentence of home detention and you're taking everyone to task for the prempt and deriding anyone who thinks HD is a soft option.

I'd have thought evey one would be firmly on the side of wanting the maximum sentancing be given for FGM.

Karnal wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 4:23pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 4:18pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 4:14pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 4:10pm: Karnal wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 4:08pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:55pm: GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:52pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:49pm: You know you live in a country full of do-gooders when you can get home detention for mutilating two little girls genitalia. Unbelievable. Funny how the judge spoke very harshly of the offenders and noted how serious the crimes were, and how all involved were unremorseful, then in the next breath referred them for home detention. How bizarre. The mother going to jail and leaving the kids became an issue. It's never an issue when other people go to jail and leave their kids. Very bizarre Gordy. It most certainly is. It's how all sentencing works for women with young kids. I though you'd side with a trio of muslim mutilators. Explaining how the laws works to ignorant bigots is not the same as siding with Muslim mutilators. Nobody here is saying that the sentence of 15 months imprisonment is inappropriate, or that it should be a suspended sentence. You always let your emotions get in the way of the facts, Homo. Why is that? You are your typical minority apologist pecca. If it was a 'bogan" who cut some clits off you'd being banging on about jail time. It's funny how you never asked why DOCS didn't take the kids away? That's happened for less than cutting clits off. Sorry, Homo, what does a "bogan" have to do with this? Are you suggesting this sentence has something to do with ethnicity?

Oh yes. Do-gooder judges melt at the sight of a third world migrant. Why are the kids left with a family who wants these kids to feel pain when they have intercourse? I doubt they'll grow up to have non muslim friends and relationships.

Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 4:26pm:

Karnal wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 4:23pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 4:18pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 4:14pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 4:10pm: Karnal wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 4:08pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:55pm: GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:52pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:49pm: You know you live in a country full of do-gooders when you can get home detention for mutilating two little girls genitalia. Unbelievable. Funny how the judge spoke very harshly of the offenders and noted how serious the crimes were, and how all involved were unremorseful, then in the next breath referred them for home detention. How bizarre. The mother going to jail and leaving the kids became an issue. It's never an issue when other people go to jail and leave their kids. Very bizarre Gordy. It most certainly is. It's how all sentencing works for women with young kids. I though you'd side with a trio of muslim mutilators. Explaining how the laws works to ignorant bigots is not the same as siding with Muslim mutilators. Nobody here is saying that the sentence of 15 months imprisonment is inappropriate, or that it should be a suspended sentence. You always let your emotions get in the way of the facts, Homo. Why is that? You are your typical minority apologist pecca. If it was a 'bogan" who cut some clits off you'd being banging on about jail time. It's funny how you never asked why DOCS didn't take the kids away? That's happened for less than cutting clits off. Sorry, Homo, what does a "bogan" have to do with this? Are you suggesting this sentence has something to do with ethnicity? Oh yes. Do-gooder judges melt at the sight of a third world migrant. Why are the kids left with a family who wants these kids to feel pain when they have intercourse? I doubt they'll grow up to have non muslim friends and relationships.

See my response on the OOHC system above, dear. No one wants to see kids removed from a good home. FGM is not, in itself, a sign of bad parenting, just as male circumcision is not considered a child protection issue.

I don't think anyone here is saying this doesn't warrant a custodial sentence. You're the first, however, to bring third world migrants and non-Muslim friends into it.

Good work.

Karnal wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 4:33pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 4:26pm: Karnal wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 4:23pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 4:18pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 4:14pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 4:10pm: Karnal wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 4:08pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:55pm: GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:52pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 3:49pm: You know you live in a country full of do-gooders when you can get home detention for mutilating two little girls genitalia. Unbelievable. Funny how the judge spoke very harshly of the offenders and noted how serious the crimes were, and how all involved were unremorseful, then in the next breath referred them for home detention. How bizarre. The mother going to jail and leaving the kids became an issue. It's never an issue when other people go to jail and leave their kids. Very bizarre Gordy. It most certainly is. It's how all sentencing works for women with young kids. I though you'd side with a trio of muslim mutilators. Explaining how the laws works to ignorant bigots is not the same as siding with Muslim mutilators. Nobody here is saying that the sentence of 15 months imprisonment is inappropriate, or that it should be a suspended sentence. You always let your emotions get in the way of the facts, Homo. Why is that? You are your typical minority apologist pecca. If it was a 'bogan" who cut some clits off you'd being banging on about jail time. It's funny how you never asked why DOCS didn't take the kids away? That's happened for less than cutting clits off. Sorry, Homo, what does a "bogan" have to do with this? Are you suggesting this sentence has something to do with ethnicity? Oh yes. Do-gooder judges melt at the sight of a third world migrant. Why are the kids left with a family who wants these kids to feel pain when they have intercourse? I doubt they'll grow up to have non muslim friends and relationships. See my response on the OOHC system above, dear. No one wants to see kids removed from a good home. FGM is not, in itself, a sign of bad parenting, just as male circumcision is not considered a child protection issue. I don't think anyone here is saying this doesn't warrant a custodial sentence. You're the first, however, to bring third world migrants and non-Muslim friends into it. Good work.

Lovely home!
The older girl said in court she had been told to lie on a bed naked from the waist down and imagine she was a“princess in a garden” while FGM was carried out on her by Magennis, who had been asked by the girl’s mother to perform the khatna.

The girl’s grandmother was also in the room and prayers from the Qur’an were read while the ceremony took place.

GordyL wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 3:30pm:

An example has been set (if they're given HD) that for FGM, you don't go to jail. The people who do FGM are unlikely to understand the nuances in sentencing and what HD means. They will only understand the take home message. FGM = no jail.

And these Muslim women are unemployed 'home body' chattels to their husbands anyway.

GordyL wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 4:52pm:

Lovely home! The older girl said in court she had been told to lie on a bed naked from the waist down and imagine she was a“princess in a garden” while FGM was carried out on her by Magennis, who had been asked by the girl’s mother to perform the khatna. The girl’s grandmother was also in the room and prayers from the Qur’an were read while the ceremony took place.

These people are human garbage.

It's not hard to believe what other extremist Islamic views these idíots from the 7th century believe in.

You can bet your nuts they support ISIS and the other fundamentalist knuckle-draggers.

Some day, one day, in the fullness of time, a party will be in power that will sort through all of these people one by one to assess what they advocate for - and then mass-deportations will occur to rid the West of all those who are ideological lunatics from the Dark Ages.

Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 5:12pm:

GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 4:52pm: Lovely home! The older girl said in court she had been told to lie on a bed naked from the waist down and imagine she was a“princess in a garden” while FGM was carried out on her by Magennis, who had been asked by the girl’s mother to perform the khatna. The girl’s grandmother was also in the room and prayers from the Qur’an were read while the ceremony took place. These people are human garbage. It's not hard to believe what other extremist Islamic views these idíots from the 7th century believe in. You can bet your nuts they support ISIS and the other fundamentalist knuckle-draggers. Some day, one day, in the fullness of time, a party will be in power that will sort through all of these people one by one to assess what they advocate for - and then mass-deportations will occur to rid the West of all those who are ideological lunatics from the Dark Ages.

Prob not ISIS because they are Shia and ISIS would kill them, but I'm sure they'd believe in hanging gays and feminists.

It may be a little disappointing, but these people have not been found guilty of being Muslims, but performing femal e genital mutilation.

I know. I blame the politicians. Typical.

Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 5:12pm:

- and then mass-deportations will occur to rid the West of all those who are ideological lunatics from the Dark Ages.

Give me a yell if you need a hand packing your bag.


https://comediansteviemack.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/hobostick5.jpg

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 5:54pm:

Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 5:12pm: - and then mass-deportations will occur to rid the West of all those who are ideological lunatics from the Dark Ages. Give me a yell if need a hand packing your bag.

Considering the government is deporting people with 12 months or more in the can your beloved mutilators could be going home if not citizens.

Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 5:59pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 5:54pm: Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 5:12pm: - and then mass-deportations will occur to rid the West of all those who are ideological lunatics from the Dark Ages. Give me a yell if need a hand packing your bag. Considering the government is deporting people with 12 months or more in the can your beloved mutilators could be going home if not citizens.

That’s quite true.

There you go, Homo, you’re cultivating a legal mind. I always knew you had it in you.

Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 5:59pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 5:54pm: Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 5:12pm: - and then mass-deportations will occur to rid the West of all those who are ideological lunatics from the Dark Ages. Give me a yell if need a hand packing your bag. Considering the government is deporting people with 12 months or more in the can your beloved mutilators could be going home if not citizens.

I don't have any beloved mutilators, Homo.

I've condemned the practice from the very first post, and have said that the 15 months imprisonment should be served in full.

Perhaps you've mistaken me for someone else?

Perhaps you've had a stroke?

Perhaps English isn't your first language?

Perhaps you are an uneducated, ignorant bigot who is so consumed by the irrational fear & hatred of everything that is different to yourself that you're just incapable of objective, rational thought?

Any of these a possibility, Homo?

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 6:04pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 5:59pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 5:54pm: Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 5:12pm: - and then mass-deportations will occur to rid the West of all those who are ideological lunatics from the Dark Ages. Give me a yell if need a hand packing your bag. Considering the government is deporting people with 12 months or more in the can your beloved mutilators could be going home if not citizens. I don't have any beloved mutilators, Homo. I've condemned the practice from the very first post, and have said that the 15 months imprisonment should be served in full. Perhaps you've mistaken me for someone else? Perhaps you've had a stroke? Perhaps English isn't your first language? Perhaps you are an uneducated, ignorant bigot who is so consumed by the irrational fear & hatred of everything that is different to yourself that you're just incapable of objective, rational though? Any of these a possibility, Homo?

I know one thing, you are a ball licking minority apologist of the highest order.

Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 6:09pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 6:04pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 5:59pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 5:54pm: Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 5:12pm: - and then mass-deportations will occur to rid the West of all those who are ideological lunatics from the Dark Ages. Give me a yell if need a hand packing your bag. Considering the government is deporting people with 12 months or more in the can your beloved mutilators could be going home if not citizens. I don't have any beloved mutilators, Homo. I've condemned the practice from the very first post, and have said that the 15 months imprisonment should be served in full. Perhaps you've mistaken me for someone else? Perhaps you've had a stroke? Perhaps English isn't your first language? Perhaps you are an uneducated, ignorant bigot who is so consumed by the irrational fear & hatred of everything that is different to yourself that you're just incapable of objective, rational thought? Any of these a possibility, Homo? I know one thing, you are a ball licking minority apologist of the highest order.

Tell me again, Homo: for whom am I apologising?

Perhaps you could provide a link?

I've condemned the practice of FGM, and have maintained all along that all three criminals in this case should serve out their full sentences.

I'm certainly not making excuses for uneducated, irrational bigots whose lives are consumed by fear and hatred (hello to you Herbie, if you're watching).

So, who is it that I'm an apologist for?

Karnal wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 4:13pm:

You're right, dear. I have no clit.

ohhh, he'll be sooo disappointed. He was after a souvenir

John Smith wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 6:18pm:

Karnal wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 4:13pm: You're right, dear. I have no clit. ohhh, he'll be sooo disappointed. He was after a souvenir

I'm sure he's used to it.

It sounds like his life has just been one disappointment after another.

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 6:25pm:

John Smith wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 6:18pm: Karnal wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 4:13pm: You're right, dear. I have no clit. ohhh, he'll be sooo disappointed. He was after a souvenir I'm sure he's used to it. It sounds like his life has just been one disappointment after another.

You're are the one bitching like a sheila with her dress pulled up.

Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 6:34pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 6:25pm: John Smith wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 6:18pm: Karnal wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 4:13pm: You're right, dear. I have no clit. ohhh, he'll be sooo disappointed. He was after a souvenir I'm sure he's used to it. It sounds like his life has just been one disappointment after another. You're are the one bitching like a sheila with her dress pulled up.

Nope.

I say that all three criminals deserved their sentences, and that I'm happy to see them serve the full term.

Tell me again, Homo: where is the bitching?

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 6:40pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 6:34pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 6:25pm: John Smith wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 6:18pm: Karnal wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 4:13pm: You're right, dear. I have no clit. ohhh, he'll be sooo disappointed. He was after a souvenir I'm sure he's used to it. It sounds like his life has just been one disappointment after another. You're are the one bitching like a sheila with her dress pulled up. Nope. I say that all three criminals deserved their sentences, and that I'm happy to see them serve the full term. Tell me again, Homo: where is the bitching?

But you ARE carrying on like a pork chop about people criticizing the judges request to have them assessed for home detention, and carrying on like a HUGE pork chop that people dared to preempt the actual order.

You've expended way more energy taking people to task for this stuff than being dismayed at the crims being given the very lowest range of sentencing available.

GordyL wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 6:47pm:

But you ARE carrying on like a pork chop about people criticizing the judges request to have them assessed for home detention, and carrying on like a HUGE pork chop that people dared to preempt the actual order.

There's certainly a porcine odour coming from you, Homo, and Herbie, et al.

I'm just showing respect for the rule of law.

Why do you have such little respect for our legal process - are you a criminal?

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 6:55pm:

GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 6:47pm: But you ARE carrying on like a pork chop about people criticizing the judges request to have them assessed for home detention, and carrying on like a HUGE pork chop that people dared to preempt the actual order. There's certainly a porcine odour coming from you, Homo, and Herbie, et al. I'm just showing respect for the rule of law. Why do you have such little respect for our legal process - are you a criminal?

The rule of law was just fine, but time and time and time again the judiciary get sentencing so so so wrong.
This seems to be one of those times.

Nice resort to ad hominem. All class.

GordyL wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 7:00pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 6:55pm: GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 6:47pm: But you ARE carrying on like a pork chop about people criticizing the judges request to have them assessed for home detention, and carrying on like a HUGE pork chop that people dared to preempt the actual order. There's certainly a porcine odour coming from you, Homo, and Herbie, et al. I'm just showing respect for the rule of law. Why do you have such little respect for our legal process - are you a criminal? The rule of law was just fine, but time and time and time again the judiciary get sentencing so so so wrong. This seems to be one of those times. Nice resort to ad hominem. All class.

How is 15 months imprisonment "wrong"?

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 7:03pm:

GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 7:00pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 6:55pm: GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 6:47pm: But you ARE carrying on like a pork chop about people criticizing the judges request to have them assessed for home detention, and carrying on like a HUGE pork chop that people dared to preempt the actual order. There's certainly a porcine odour coming from you, Homo, and Herbie, et al. I'm just showing respect for the rule of law. Why do you have such little respect for our legal process - are you a criminal? The rule of law was just fine, but time and time and time again the judiciary get sentencing so so so wrong. This seems to be one of those times. Nice resort to ad hominem. All class. How is 15 months imprisonment "wrong"?

Round and round we go. They're going to get home detention.
I personally feel that's a less than adequate outcome. Let's wait and see

GordyL wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 7:19pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 7:03pm: GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 7:00pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 6:55pm: GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 6:47pm: But you ARE carrying on like a pork chop about people criticizing the judges request to have them assessed for home detention, and carrying on like a HUGE pork chop that people dared to preempt the actual order. There's certainly a porcine odour coming from you, Homo, and Herbie, et al. I'm just showing respect for the rule of law. Why do you have such little respect for our legal process - are you a criminal? The rule of law was just fine, but time and time and time again the judiciary get sentencing so so so wrong. This seems to be one of those times. Nice resort to ad hominem. All class. How is 15 months imprisonment "wrong"? Round and round we go. They're going to get home detention. I personally feel that's a less than adequate outcome. Let's wait and see

Sorry, Gordy, are you saying let’s wait and see?

Oh, my God, that’s heinous spineless apologism of the highest order! It’s carrying on like a pork chop!

Oh, when will these people ever learn?

Karnal wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 7:32pm:

GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 7:19pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 7:03pm: GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 7:00pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 6:55pm: GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 6:47pm: But you ARE carrying on like a pork chop about people criticizing the judges request to have them assessed for home detention, and carrying on like a HUGE pork chop that people dared to preempt the actual order. There's certainly a porcine odour coming from you, Homo, and Herbie, et al. I'm just showing respect for the rule of law. Why do you have such little respect for our legal process - are you a criminal? The rule of law was just fine, but time and time and time again the judiciary get sentencing so so so wrong. This seems to be one of those times. Nice resort to ad hominem. All class. How is 15 months imprisonment "wrong"? Round and round we go. They're going to get home detention. I personally feel that's a less than adequate outcome. Let's wait and see Sorry, Gordy, are you saying let’s wait and see? Oh, my God, that’s heinous spineless apologism of the highest order! It’s carrying on like a pork chop! Oh, when will these people ever learn?

I'd put $1k on the mum getting HD

I’d just like to know what home detention is and how many people are sentenced to it.

As you can see, Gordy, I’m a pork chop too.

But Justice Peter Johnson told the mother who arranged the female genital mutilation on her two daughters, and the midwife who carried it out, that they would have got a tougher sentence if the offences were committed after May 20, 2014 when parliament increased the maximum penalty from seven to 22 years.

What an utter farce.

***

Justice Johnson told the three that he had sentenced them based on the maximum penalty of seven years for genital mutilation, which existed at the time of the offences in 2009 and 2012.

What an utter travesty of justice.

No wonder Muslims have utter contempt for our judges and our courts.

link

Herbie, of course, is completely balanced and unemotional about the issue.

Karnal wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 7:49pm:

I’d just like to know what home detention is and how many people are sentenced to it. As you can see, Gordy, I’m a pork chop too.

http://www.judcom.nsw.gov.au/publications/benchbks/sentencing/home_detention_orders.html

 [4-040] Substantially less onerous than prison

The court held in R v Jurisic (1998) 45 NSWLR 209 at 215 that home detention is a substantially less onerous sentence than imprisonment within the confines of a prison. Home detention should not be equated with full-time incarceration

Of course it’s less onerous, Gordy, it would be ridiculous to argue otherwise.

I’m asking if it’s a common sentence in Australia and what criteria is used to assess people for it. What sort of crimes and offenders are candidates? What restrictions are placed on them?

I too would like to wait and see, but as we all know, I’m a hysterical spineless apologist and pork chop.

Utter farce. Utter travestry. Hideous contempt. Despicable appeasement.

I guess I’ll be dealt with in the fullness of time, no?

Karnal wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 7:59pm:

Herbie, of course, is completely balanced and unemotional about the issue.

What 'balance' is there in a 'stay at home order' when the maximum sentence was 7 years in jail for mothers of small girls - and which has now been raised to 22 years jail for mothers of small girls?

Those sentencing provisions were made in the full knowledge that the jail time would be applied to mothers of small girls - and yet here we have this apologist idíot of a judge protecting the identity of the mother because of her girls, and exempting her from going to jail - because of the girls.

He has made a travesty and a laughing stock of the law.

Have you got a law link, Herbie? Now I am curious.

Something other than a UK tabloid article would be nice, thanks.

It would be good to look at this with all the evidence and make up our own minds, but I’m hysterical that way, as you know.

GordyL wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 7:19pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 7:03pm: GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 7:00pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 6:55pm: GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 6:47pm: But you ARE carrying on like a pork chop about people criticizing the judges request to have them assessed for home detention, and carrying on like a HUGE pork chop that people dared to preempt the actual order. There's certainly a porcine odour coming from you, Homo, and Herbie, et al. I'm just showing respect for the rule of law. Why do you have such little respect for our legal process - are you a criminal? The rule of law was just fine, but time and time and time again the judiciary get sentencing so so so wrong. This seems to be one of those times. Nice resort to ad hominem. All class. How is 15 months imprisonment "wrong"? Round and round we go. They're going to get home detention. I personally feel that's a less than adequate outcome. Let's wait and see

How is 15 months imprisonment "wrong"?

Karnal wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 7:59pm:

Herbie, of course, is completely balanced and unemotional about the issue.

There's no way in the world that you held a straight face while typing that.

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21^st, 2016 at 8:43pm:

GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 7:19pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 7:03pm: GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 7:00pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 6:55pm: GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 6:47pm: But you ARE carrying on like a pork chop about people criticizing the judges request to have them assessed for home detention, and carrying on like a HUGE pork chop that people dared to preempt the actual order. There's certainly a porcine odour coming from you, Homo, and Herbie, et al. I'm just showing respect for the rule of law. Why do you have such little respect for our legal process - are you a criminal? The rule of law was just fine, but time and time and time again the judiciary get sentencing so so so wrong. This seems to be one of those times. Nice resort to ad hominem. All class. How is 15 months imprisonment "wrong"? Round and round we go. They're going to get home detention. I personally feel that's a less than adequate outcome. Let's wait and see How is 15 months imprisonment "wrong"?

Up to 7 years is possible. 15 months is at the low end of whats available, no?

GordyL wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2016 at 7:27am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 8:43pm: GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 7:19pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 7:03pm: GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 7:00pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 6:55pm: GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 6:47pm: But you ARE carrying on like a pork chop about people criticizing the judges request to have them assessed for home detention, and carrying on like a HUGE pork chop that people dared to preempt the actual order. There's certainly a porcine odour coming from you, Homo, and Herbie, et al. I'm just showing respect for the rule of law. Why do you have such little respect for our legal process - are you a criminal? The rule of law was just fine, but time and time and time again the judiciary get sentencing so so so wrong. This seems to be one of those times. Nice resort to ad hominem. All class. How is 15 months imprisonment "wrong"? Round and round we go. They're going to get home detention. I personally feel that's a less than adequate outcome. Let's wait and see How is 15 months imprisonment "wrong"? Up to 7 years is possible. 15 months is at the low end of whats available, no?

How is it "wrong"?

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2016 at 8:17am:

GordyL wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 7:27am: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 8:43pm: GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 7:19pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 7:03pm: GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 7:00pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 6:55pm: GordyL wrote on Mar 21st, 2016 at 6:47pm: But you ARE carrying on like a pork chop about people criticizing the judges request to have them assessed for home detention, and carrying on like a HUGE pork chop that people dared to preempt the actual order. There's certainly a porcine odour coming from you, Homo, and Herbie, et al. I'm just showing respect for the rule of law. Why do you have such little respect for our legal process - are you a criminal? The rule of law was just fine, but time and time and time again the judiciary get sentencing so so so wrong. This seems to be one of those times. Nice resort to ad hominem. All class. How is 15 months imprisonment "wrong"? Round and round we go. They're going to get home detention. I personally feel that's a less than adequate outcome. Let's wait and see How is 15 months imprisonment "wrong"? Up to 7 years is possible. 15 months is at the low end of whats available, no? How is it "wrong"?

I thought the low end of sentencing is given when police cooperation is given and remorse is shown.

In this case police were lied to and remorse was not shown yet the low end of sentencing, 10 months out of a possible 7 years.

Would you say they got the very low end of sentencing?

GordyL wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2016 at 8:25am:

I thought the low end of sentencing is given when police cooperation is given and remorse is shown.

What made you think that?

Do you have a reference to legislation, or guidelines, that set out this law/policy?


GordyL wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2016 at 8:25am:

Would you say they got the very low end of sentencing?

It's at the low end, yes.

How is that "wrong"?

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2016 at 8:31am:

GordyL wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:25am: I thought the low end of sentencing is given when police cooperation is given and remorse is shown. What made you think that? Do you have a reference to legislation, or guidelines, that set out this law/policy? GordyL wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:25am: Would you say they got the very low end of sentencing? It's at the low end, yes. How is that "wrong"?

Defending minorities again I see. It's not only wrong the sentence is atrocious numptoid.

Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2016 at 8:35am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:31am: GordyL wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:25am: I thought the low end of sentencing is given when police cooperation is given and remorse is shown. What made you think that? Do you have a reference to legislation, or guidelines, that set out this law/policy? GordyL wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:25am: Would you say they got the very low end of sentencing? It's at the low end, yes. How is that "wrong"? Defending minorities again I see. It's not only wrong the sentence is atrocious numptoid.

Nobody is defending these criminals.

How is it "wrong"?

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2016 at 8:37am:

Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:35am: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:31am: GordyL wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:25am: I thought the low end of sentencing is given when police cooperation is given and remorse is shown. What made you think that? Do you have a reference to legislation, or guidelines, that set out this law/policy? GordyL wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:25am: Would you say they got the very low end of sentencing? It's at the low end, yes. How is that "wrong"? Defending minorities again I see. It's not only wrong the sentence is atrocious numptoid. Nobody is defending these criminals. How is it "wrong"?

Several months in home detention for permanently  damaging 2 young girls genitalia?????  :-? :-? And the kids are still in their custody????

Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2016 at 8:39am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:37am: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:35am: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:31am: GordyL wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:25am: I thought the low end of sentencing is given when police cooperation is given and remorse is shown. What made you think that? Do you have a reference to legislation, or guidelines, that set out this law/policy? GordyL wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:25am: Would you say they got the very low end of sentencing? It's at the low end, yes. How is that "wrong"? Defending minorities again I see. It's not only wrong the sentence is atrocious numptoid. Nobody is defending these criminals. How is it "wrong"? Several months in home detention for permanently  damaging 2 young girls genitalia?????  :-? :-? And the kids are still in their custody????

They haven't been given home detention.

Pay attention.

And, even if they are eventually given home detention, how is that "wrong"?

Why do you not respect our laws and judicial system?

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2016 at 8:42am:

Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:39am: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:37am: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:35am: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:31am: GordyL wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:25am: I thought the low end of sentencing is given when police cooperation is given and remorse is shown. What made you think that? Do you have a reference to legislation, or guidelines, that set out this law/policy? GordyL wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:25am: Would you say they got the very low end of sentencing? It's at the low end, yes. How is that "wrong"? Defending minorities again I see. It's not only wrong the sentence is atrocious numptoid. Nobody is defending these criminals. How is it "wrong"? Several months in home detention for permanently  damaging 2 young girls genitalia?????  :-? :-? And the kids are still in their custody???? They haven't been given home detention. Pay attention. And, even if they are eventually given home detention, how is that "wrong"? Why do you not respect our laws and judicial system?

I don't respect the judicial system because it's run by leftist douchebags who give lenient sentences to minority groups.

GordyL wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2016 at 8:25am:

In this case ... remorse was not shown ...

You might want to check on that.

Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2016 at 8:44am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:42am: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:39am: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:37am: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:35am: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:31am: GordyL wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:25am: I thought the low end of sentencing is given when police cooperation is given and remorse is shown. What made you think that? Do you have a reference to legislation, or guidelines, that set out this law/policy? GordyL wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:25am: Would you say they got the very low end of sentencing? It's at the low end, yes. How is that "wrong"? Defending minorities again I see. It's not only wrong the sentence is atrocious numptoid. Nobody is defending these criminals. How is it "wrong"? Several months in home detention for permanently  damaging 2 young girls genitalia?????  :-? :-? And the kids are still in their custody???? They haven't been given home detention. Pay attention. And, even if they are eventually given home detention, how is that "wrong"? Why do you not respect our laws and judicial system? I don't respect the judicial system because it's run by leftist douchebags who give lenient sentences to minority groups.

They haven't been given home detention.

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2016 at 8:47am:

Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:44am: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:42am: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:39am: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:37am: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:35am: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:31am: GordyL wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:25am: I thought the low end of sentencing is given when police cooperation is given and remorse is shown. What made you think that? Do you have a reference to legislation, or guidelines, that set out this law/policy? GordyL wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:25am: Would you say they got the very low end of sentencing? It's at the low end, yes. How is that "wrong"? Defending minorities again I see. It's not only wrong the sentence is atrocious numptoid. Nobody is defending these criminals. How is it "wrong"? Several months in home detention for permanently  damaging 2 young girls genitalia?????  :-? :-? And the kids are still in their custody???? They haven't been given home detention. Pay attention. And, even if they are eventually given home detention, how is that "wrong"? Why do you not respect our laws and judicial system? I don't respect the judicial system because it's run by leftist douchebags who give lenient sentences to minority groups. They haven't been given home detention.

It's being serious considered and will be implemented. The head muslim who gave the green light is too old and sick for the can an they don't want the mother split from the kids. End of story.

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2016 at 8:46am:

GordyL wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:25am: In this case ... remorse was not shown ... You might want to check on that.

During a sentencing hearing in the New South Wales Supreme Court, crown prosecutor Nanette Williams said the girls were "effectively voiceless" in the face of their mother and Magennis.

She said none of the offenders had shown any remorse and they had only given "qualified, ambiguous and self-serving" apologies.

GordyL wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2016 at 8:51am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:46am: GordyL wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:25am: In this case ... remorse was not shown ... You might want to check on that. During a sentencing hearing in the New South Wales Supreme Court, crown prosecutor Nanette Williams said the girls were "effectively voiceless" in the face of their mother and Magennis. She said none of the offenders had shown any remorse and they had only given "qualified, ambiguous and self-serving" apologies.

There you go Pecca. You should fully read articles before you comment on them.

Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2016 at 8:49am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:47am: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:44am: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:42am: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:39am: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:37am: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:35am: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:31am: GordyL wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:25am: I thought the low end of sentencing is given when police cooperation is given and remorse is shown. What made you think that? Do you have a reference to legislation, or guidelines, that set out this law/policy? GordyL wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:25am: Would you say they got the very low end of sentencing? It's at the low end, yes. How is that "wrong"? Defending minorities again I see. It's not only wrong the sentence is atrocious numptoid. Nobody is defending these criminals. How is it "wrong"? Several months in home detention for permanently  damaging 2 young girls genitalia?????  :-? :-? And the kids are still in their custody???? They haven't been given home detention. Pay attention. And, even if they are eventually given home detention, how is that "wrong"? Why do you not respect our laws and judicial system? I don't respect the judicial system because it's run by leftist douchebags who give lenient sentences to minority groups. They haven't been given home detention. It's being serious considered and will be implemented. The head muslim who gave the green light is too old and sick for the can an they don't want the mother split from the kids. End of story.

How is it "wrong"?

Would it make you happier if the courts just imposed long prison sentences on anyone who looks different to yourself?

Not for committing any crimes - just for being ethnic.

Would that make everything alright?

Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2016 at 8:52am:

GordyL wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:51am: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:46am: GordyL wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:25am: In this case ... remorse was not shown ... You might want to check on that. During a sentencing hearing in the New South Wales Supreme Court, crown prosecutor Nanette Williams said the girls were "effectively voiceless" in the face of their mother and Magennis. She said none of the offenders had shown any remorse and they had only given "qualified, ambiguous and self-serving" apologies. There you go Pecca. You should fully read articles before you comment on them.

You know what I like to do, Homo?

I like to read the articles from start to finish, and then try to find other articles on the same subject, just so that I'm getting a balanced view.

I also look for the most recent articles available, so that I'm completely up-to-date.

For example:

"The court today heard A2 had made it clear that she did not intend to have khatna performed on her two younger daughters and the Department of Family and Community Services had concluded they did not need to be removed from her care.

"The judge said A2 had apologised to her girls in a letter.

"Khatna has been a practice in our culture for 14 centuries," she wrote.

"The courts found you were injured and I was responsible.

"I thought I was doing what was required culturally and I accept it was against the law.

"I am very sorry to have put you through this. My love always."

"Justice Johnson said he was "satisfied the apologies are genuine and demonstrative of remorse".

"I accept A2 is a loving mother of her daughters," he said."

White flag accepted.

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2016 at 9:23am:

Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:52am: GordyL wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:51am: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:46am: GordyL wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:25am: In this case ... remorse was not shown ... You might want to check on that. During a sentencing hearing in the New South Wales Supreme Court, crown prosecutor Nanette Williams said the girls were "effectively voiceless" in the face of their mother and Magennis. She said none of the offenders had shown any remorse and they had only given "qualified, ambiguous and self-serving" apologies. There you go Pecca. You should fully read articles before you comment on them. You know what I like to do, Homo? I like to read the articles from start to finish, and then try to find other articles on the same subject, just so that I'm getting a balanced view. I also look for the most recent articles available, so that I'm completely up-to-date. For example: "The court today heard A2 had made it clear that she did not intend to have khatna performed on her two younger daughters and the Department of Family and Community Services had concluded they did not need to be removed from her care. "The judge said A2 had apologised to her girls in a letter. "Khatna has been a practice in our culture for 14 centuries," she wrote. "The courts found you were injured and I was responsible. "I thought I was doing what was required culturally and I accept it was against the law. "I am very sorry to have put you through this. My love always." "Justice Johnson said he was "satisfied the apologies are genuine and demonstrative of remorse". "I accept A2 is a loving mother of her daughters," he said." White flag accepted.

Sure, but what would the judge know? Surely Homo is in a much better position to judge this case. He read the headline in the UK Daily Mail. He knows all about judicial sentencing practices.

Why should we listen to some judge?

Karnal wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2016 at 9:27am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 9:23am: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:52am: GordyL wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:51am: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:46am: GordyL wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:25am: In this case ... remorse was not shown ... You might want to check on that. During a sentencing hearing in the New South Wales Supreme Court, crown prosecutor Nanette Williams said the girls were "effectively voiceless" in the face of their mother and Magennis. She said none of the offenders had shown any remorse and they had only given "qualified, ambiguous and self-serving" apologies. There you go Pecca. You should fully read articles before you comment on them. You know what I like to do, Homo? I like to read the articles from start to finish, and then try to find other articles on the same subject, just so that I'm getting a balanced view. I also look for the most recent articles available, so that I'm completely up-to-date. For example: "The court today heard A2 had made it clear that she did not intend to have khatna performed on her two younger daughters and the Department of Family and Community Services had concluded they did not need to be removed from her care. "The judge said A2 had apologised to her girls in a letter. "Khatna has been a practice in our culture for 14 centuries," she wrote. "The courts found you were injured and I was responsible. "I thought I was doing what was required culturally and I accept it was against the law. "I am very sorry to have put you through this. My love always." "Justice Johnson said he was "satisfied the apologies are genuine and demonstrative of remorse". "I accept A2 is a loving mother of her daughters," he said." White flag accepted. Sure, but what would the judge know? Surely Homo is in a much better position to judge this case. He read the headline in the UK Daily Mail. He knows all about judicial sentencing practices. Why should we listen to some judge?

Yes, I suppose you're right.

What sort of world would it be if a judge's word was seen to be more credible than a headline straight from the Daily Mail.

Classy journalism.

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2016 at 9:34am:

Karnal wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 9:27am: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 9:23am: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:52am: GordyL wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:51am: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:46am: GordyL wrote on Mar 22nd, 2016 at 8:25am: In this case ... remorse was not shown ... You might want to check on that. During a sentencing hearing in the New South Wales Supreme Court, crown prosecutor Nanette Williams said the girls were "effectively voiceless" in the face of their mother and Magennis. She said none of the offenders had shown any remorse and they had only given "qualified, ambiguous and self-serving" apologies. There you go Pecca. You should fully read articles before you comment on them. You know what I like to do, Homo? I like to read the articles from start to finish, and then try to find other articles on the same subject, just so that I'm getting a balanced view. I also look for the most recent articles available, so that I'm completely up-to-date. For example: "The court today heard A2 had made it clear that she did not intend to have khatna performed on her two younger daughters and the Department of Family and Community Services had concluded they did not need to be removed from her care. "The judge said A2 had apologised to her girls in a letter. "Khatna has been a practice in our culture for 14 centuries," she wrote. "The courts found you were injured and I was responsible. "I thought I was doing what was required culturally and I accept it was against the law. "I am very sorry to have put you through this. My love always." "Justice Johnson said he was "satisfied the apologies are genuine and demonstrative of remorse". "I accept A2 is a loving mother of her daughters," he said." White flag accepted. Sure, but what would the judge know? Surely Homo is in a much better position to judge this case. He read the headline in the UK Daily Mail. He knows all about judicial sentencing practices. Why should we listen to some judge? Yes, I suppose you're right. What sort of world would it be if a judge's word was seen to be more credible than a headline straight from the Daily Mail. Classy journalism.

That's not fair, Greggery. Herbie says the UK Daily Mail is brave enough to say what the mainstream media won't tell us. This newspaper has integrity. Herbie references it all the time.

Homo, of course, prefers to rely on his own judgment. He comes from Western Sydney. How could he possibly mix things up?