[Ammi]

…these incredibly short prison sentences for incredibly serious crimes are very worrying and if it all follows the line of the justice system, then that system is not ‘fit for purpose’, surely…..this man committed 21 sex offences over 6 years, including against children ….he's a serial sex offender whose prison sentence for ‘rehabilitation’…?….will in effect be around 25 months served….and our justice system is saying that the person will then walk out of that prison will be adjusted and integrated into society…‘no longer a threat’….?…is what is presumed, otherwise what is the system for and how does it protect society etc …..this person had spy cameras in his house so as to watch women and children in their homes….

…anyway…’his story…’….

POLICE have shared details of their investigation into a sexual offender from Hartford.

Ryan Beaumont was sentenced to three years in prison at Chester Crown Court on Friday (February 23).

It comes after the 38-year-old, of Homewood Crescent, admitted to a string of 21 offences including upskirting, voyeurism and taking and possessing indecent images of children.

Following the sentencing, DC Victoria Hazlewood said: “Beaumont’s behaviour was an extreme and distressing example of invading people’s privacy, not only filming up skirts, but even hiding cameras in his own home in an attempt to capture indecent footage of his guests.

“Beaumont thought his offending was going unnoticed, however one of his victims became suspicious of his behaviour while he was working as a mechanic and reported it to police.

“When we examined his electronic devices, we discovered various videos and thanks to the strength of this evidence, he was left with no choice but to admit his offending.

“I hope the sentence handed to Beaumont today will provide some reassurance to his victims who have shown immense bravery throughout this investigation.”

Beaumont’s offences were first brought to Cheshire Police’s attention in June 2021 after he was reported for upskirting a woman while working as a mobile mechanic.

He was arrested and his electronic devices seized, revealing hundreds of videos and photographs of both his victims and others found online.

In police interviews, Beaumont admitted to hiding cameras in the spare room and in a sponge in the bathroom of his former home in Deeside to capture people getting changed and using the toilet.

He told officers he got an adrenaline rush from obtaining footage without the victim’s knowledge and would keep his phone on record at all times and film whenever he saw an opportunity.

In total he was charged with seven counts of taking indecent images of children, two counts of possessing images of children, eight counts of voyeurism and four counts of upskirting.

On top of his custodial sentence, of which he will only have to serve half before being released on licence, Beaumont is subject to an indefinite sexual harm prevention order and will be on the sex offenders register for life.

He is also banned from working with children and banned from owning a mobile phone with a camera.

Sentencing, Judge Simon Berkson called Beaumont's offending an 'appalling breach of trust'.

He added: “This has been a long and painstaking investigation by the officer. She had to identify victims and notify them that they themselves or their children have been victims of sexual offences committed by you.

“No person should blame themselves for your offending. It can only be hoped that the victims can get on with their lives. Prison is the only appropriate sentence.”

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/extreme-di...050000929.html

…this article also…

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-englan...ester-68403122

[Zizu]

The sentencing in this country has been laughable for decades .. just getting more and more ridiculous imho


That’s why the country is broken beyond repair ..

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Niamh.]

A lot of the problem as well is when these people have multiple charges/crimes, they allow the sentencing to run concurrently rather than consecutively so basically they only serve a sentence for one crime which makes no sense at all and is a slap in the face to their victims

[bitontheslide]

the sentences are all determined by cold, hard guidelines that judges are allowed to adjust by agreed margins depending on specific circumstances. It's done this way for consistency. So, while we may subjectively say thats lenient or thats harsh, there is very little room for manoeuvre regarding sentences

[Soldier Boy]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

the sentences are all determined by cold, hard guidelines that judges are allowed to adjust by agreed margins depending on specific circumstances. It's done this way for consistency. So, while we may subjectively say thats lenient or thats harsh, there is very little room for manoeuvre regarding sentences

I mean, semantics really. We can say that the guidelines are too lenient.

The simple reality though is that there isn't enough prison capacity to keep people in longer. Although in my opinion, the solution is non-custodial punishments for non-violent criminals and use all of the available prison space for those who pose a clear physical threat to the public.

[Ammi]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

the sentences are all determined by cold, hard guidelines that judges are allowed to adjust by agreed margins depending on specific circumstances. It's done this way for consistency. So, while we may subjectively say thats lenient or thats harsh, there is very little room for manoeuvre regarding sentences

…I understand how that used to always be the way…that the law is not an emotional beast as it were…but more and more, in high profile/media cases were hearing the court victim/family impact statements being detailed…that’s kind of what set my thoughts going this morning in reading part of such a statement… we’re actually told ….’It will be taken into account by all criminal justice agencies involved in the case and it can play a key part in sentencing….’…so that kind of doesn’t really line up with there being very little room to manoeuvre in sentencing if the sentencing can’t fit all aspects of the crime….and it also doesn’t fit with the impact statements ‘playing a key part’ either….

[Zizu]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

A lot of the problem as well is when these people have multiple charges/crimes, they allow the sentencing to run concurrently rather than consecutively so basically they only serve a sentence for one crime which makes no sense at all and is a slap in the face to their victims

Totally !


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Zizu]

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy

I mean, semantics really. We can say that the guidelines are too lenient.

The simple reality though is that there isn't enough prison capacity to keep people in longer. Although in my opinion, the solution is non-custodial punishments for non-violent criminals and use all of the available prison space for those who pose a clear physical threat to the public.

Yes Sounds like a great option

At least the streets would be safer ..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[bitontheslide]

somebody committing fraud could arguably cause more suffering and death than the average serial killer, so things just aren't that easy to determine

[Gusto Brunt]

I always remember a segment from comedian Ben Elton's act, in which he made fun of loony Judges and what they said at serious trials.

One Judge said to a murderer, 'you're clearly a very decent young man who deserves the very best in life, but in this instance you did wrong'.




Madness. The courts are littered with insane Judges like that.