Just read the story on the capture of the British Night Stalker - Delroy Grant. A man who has been preying on the frail and elderly for the past 17 years. Oh yeah, 17 years in the same basic neighbourhood. Police say he's committed some of the most depraved sexual acts on pensioners - some of whom have Alzheimers or Parkinson's disease - that have ever been recorded in Metro Police history. He then attempts to deflect the blame from himself by implicating his son; telling the police that his wife is framing him and finally, but not least, telling a jury - in court - the DNA can be seen with the human eye, so he knows it's not his.
He was convicted yesterday. But here's what gets me; the judge has reserved sentencing because the barristers have several matters they want to put before him. He's also 'considering a life sentence.'
He's 'considering?' What. The. Fuck. Surely a man like this, a man who has not only preyed on some of the most vulnerable people in our society, but a man who has done all in his power to get himself off the hook; the only sane response is a life sentence. How can you possibly be only considering it? What have the barristers got to put before him? He couldn't get any less than a life sentence, could he?
Could he?
4 comments:
Hi Tenny, nice to see you back blogging.
Yeah that "guy" deserves to be put in a cell with some sicko whose going to do to him what he did to those poor pensioners.
Congrats on the baby front. All the best to you and Lady T.
Sick.
I don't get here how you can have a sentence of "Life" and then in a seperate category "Life Without the Possibility of Parole"
Shouldn't that be the same effing thing?
Rubbish: thanks for the kind words. And I think that, maybe, he might be getting a bit of a sort out in prison.
V: you said it.
Lola: You'd think, wouldn't you?
Post a Comment