Buchanan Street beggar James Campbell sentenced for raping woman

Godrup99 said:
It's a special term. He got 3 years for the rape and this is an addition to hus sentence. He will serve 3 years for that and the restriction order starts concurrently. He has clearly shown no remorse or accountability as a risk so cannot be deemed fit for parole. He remains imprisoned after the punishment sentence expires .
Click to expand...
If humza useless is the minister in question then the scumbag will be back begging in Buchanan st within 18 months.
 
alphonse said:
I think there is a misunderstanding of what the judge has done here. She has sentenced him for 3 years for the rape but has additionally imposed an Order for Lifelong Restriction (OLR). The OLR is defined as:

The Order for Lifelong Restriction (OLR) is a unique sentence. It is not imposed for the crime committed but for the risk that the individual is assessed to present to the public. It is only imposed following conviction, and only after the preparation of a detailed Risk Assessment Report (RAR) can it be considered by a Judge in the High Court.

The OLR is a true lifelong sentence, meaning that all individuals sentenced to an OLR will be the subject of a Risk Management Plan (RMP) for the rest of their life.

What this means is not that he will be free after the initial 3 year sentence but that he will not be freed until he is deemed no longer a risk (likely to be 10-20 years) and that he will forever be subject thereafter to management which could see him re-imprisoned for any future transgressions.
Click to expand...


Assuming he is 'treatable' but what happens if he has a personality disorder. The best outcome is for some other scumbag and him to wipe each other out. What a total waste of resources.
 
I can't imagine this scumbag will ever impress a release panel, so would expect him to do much more than the 3 years. Personally, I'd be in favour of lethel injection for tramps like this. Saw him regularly sitting in Bucahanan St, I wouldn't have given him the steam off ma piss.
 
0_begger.jpg



Call it out NOW you bastard's.
 
reading that article is disgusting, to think the poor woman was just trying to help him and he followed her and put her through the worst possible ordeal. I cannot imagine how someone with this mentality can be allowed back in to the community. He should be castrated.
 
A 'Top' eh? ...

Wonder what headlines the ET would have used if the guilty happened to be wearing a top affiliated to the blue part of Glasgow?
 
George Goudie said:
0_begger.jpg



Call it out NOW you bastard's.
Click to expand...
I wonder how much tax the rhat paid from the 100 quid per day he reportedly made plus the bastard stayed with his mother in Paisley so he wasn’t homeless , should be done for that as well , he fits in well with the colours he’s wearing ....Fkn mhanky tramp :mad: .
 
Prime position opened up in Buchanan Street, no rent and plenty of footfall. Rapist and Paedophile optional but Sellick tap compulsory
 
Sentences for rape (including children) need drastically increased. FFS it's not like it can be claimed it was an accident, can it?
 
Rangerstillidie said:
I don’t think it does. Anything under 4 years and he only has to serve half. If he’d been given 4 years and this order then I could maybe see your point but 3 years and he’ll be out in 18 months.
Click to expand...

Thankfully not the case with an order for life long restriction. This bheast will have to serve a minimum of four years before being considered for release. The reality is that will be more than 20years as risk to the public is main factor. That is why the Judge assesses the risk(psychiatric reports) and makes the order in this way.

If he had been given say 12 years he may have been eligible for release after 6 years but would be closer to 10.

Any prisoner on an OLR knows they are in for a long long time.
 
Walked past him many times and given him zero due to his putrid green hue, now the protestant majority will be paying for him until he eventually slips into the bowels of hell.
 
alphonse said:
I think there is a misunderstanding of what the judge has done here. She has sentenced him for 3 years for the rape but has additionally imposed an Order for Lifelong Restriction (OLR). The OLR is defined as:

The Order for Lifelong Restriction (OLR) is a unique sentence. It is not imposed for the crime committed but for the risk that the individual is assessed to present to the public. It is only imposed following conviction, and only after the preparation of a detailed Risk Assessment Report (RAR) can it be considered by a Judge in the High Court.

The OLR is a true lifelong sentence, meaning that all individuals sentenced to an OLR will be the subject of a Risk Management Plan (RMP) for the rest of their life.

What this means is not that he will be free after the initial 3 year sentence but that he will not be freed until he is deemed no longer a risk (likely to be 10-20 years) and that he will forever be subject thereafter to management which could see him re-imprisoned for any future transgressions.
Click to expand...

as per usual, folk tear into the justice system without actually knowing what has actually been imposed and then start believing their own story in their own head.

"3 years. Pffft. Be out in 18 months"
 
First wake-up call for the rat will be when told to go for a shower, the second will be when he's ordered to pick up a bar of soap, the third will happen when he bends down for it.
 
alphonse said:
I think there is a misunderstanding of what the judge has done here. She has sentenced him for 3 years for the rape but has additionally imposed an Order for Lifelong Restriction (OLR). The OLR is defined as:

The Order for Lifelong Restriction (OLR) is a unique sentence. It is not imposed for the crime committed but for the risk that the individual is assessed to present to the public. It is only imposed following conviction, and only after the preparation of a detailed Risk Assessment Report (RAR) can it be considered by a Judge in the High Court.

The OLR is a true lifelong sentence, meaning that all individuals sentenced to an OLR will be the subject of a Risk Management Plan (RMP) for the rest of their life.

What this means is not that he will be free after the initial 3 year sentence but that he will not be freed until he is deemed no longer a risk (likely to be 10-20 years) and that he will forever be subject thereafter to management which could see him re-imprisoned for any future transgressions.
Click to expand...

But the three years sentence was described as the 'punishment element' of the overall sentence, so in effect what the court is saying is 'aah, it wisnae that bad, but we'll add this other wee bit that says we'll keep an eye on him after that.' Not good enough!
 
alphonse said:
I think there is a misunderstanding of what the judge has done here. She has sentenced him for 3 years for the rape but has additionally imposed an Order for Lifelong Restriction (OLR). The OLR is defined as:

The Order for Lifelong Restriction (OLR) is a unique sentence. It is not imposed for the crime committed but for the risk that the individual is assessed to present to the public. It is only imposed following conviction, and only after the preparation of a detailed Risk Assessment Report (RAR) can it be considered by a Judge in the High Court.

The OLR is a true lifelong sentence, meaning that all individuals sentenced to an OLR will be the subject of a Risk Management Plan (RMP) for the rest of their life.

What this means is not that he will be free after the initial 3 year sentence but that he will not be freed until he is deemed no longer a risk (likely to be 10-20 years) and that he will forever be subject thereafter to management which could see him re-imprisoned for any future transgressions.
Click to expand...

So why not give the filthy fucking animal a sentence of 13 or 23 years? Or fucking life for that matter?
 
ShieldsBear said:
as per usual, folk tear into the justice system without actually knowing what has actually been imposed and then start believing their own story in their own head.

"3 years. Pffft. Be out in 18 months"
Click to expand...

Why not give him 10 years and an OLR?
 
3 years is a shockingly low punishment for the actual offence and bears no relation to the harm this oxygen thief caused to that poor woman.
He should be leathered every morning, noon and evening of his sentence, firstly for the rape and secondly for just being a filthy wee scumbag.
 
This from the BBC report. The actual sentence is 3 years. After that up to the "experts" on when he gets out. It might be 20 years it might be tthree years two months! Three is really too short for the actual sentence in those circumstances, should have been more.

Lady Stacey imposed a punishment part of three years but told Campbell: "In order to protect the public work needs to be done with you.

"There is no definite time at which you will be released. You will be seen by doctors and psychologists. As to when you are released that decision will not be taken by me, it will be taken by others."
 
How do you differentiate the the real beggars from the scum ridden con men £100 a day? Decent wage that
 
bkkbear said:
This from the BBC report. The actual sentence is 3 years. After that up to the "experts" on when he gets out. It might be 20 years it might be tthree years two months! Three is really too short for the actual sentence in those circumstances, should have been more.

Lady Stacey imposed a punishment part of three years but told Campbell: "In order to protect the public work needs to be done with you.

"There is no definite time at which you will be released. You will be seen by doctors and psychologists. As to when you are released that decision will not be taken by me, it will be taken by others."
Click to expand...

what a waste of money and time, throw way the key and let him rot
 
Why did the judge give an initial sentence of 3 years seems to be the issue some are focusing on (missing the point that he has received one of the most severe sentences which can be meted)?

We don't know: first offence? absence of weapon?; single offence?; mitigating circumstances? All of these are considered when a judge uses a sentencing formula which dictates the "appropriate" sentence (there is far less leeway than you might think if you watch US TV shows). However, the important thing is that the judge appears to have understood that 3 years on its own isn't appropriate and has given him an OLR.

This guy is going to be away for 10-20 years. Biff things 20+ and he may be right.

Either way this is far longer than he'd serve if given 15 years which, presumably, the judge couldn't give him due to the sentencing rules. Random excessive sentences are challenged on appeal.

To get parole he needs to satisfy Scottish Ministers (plural) and then needs to satisfy a parole hearing - this isn't happening after 3 years.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Latest posts

Back
Top