Dear All
Cat Stewart over at the Herald lamenting
shoving Natalie McGarry’s posterior into prison as if a wrong has been committed.
Is jailing people involved in serious crime now a crime or an injustice. How
did we get here when people think that special treatment should be doled out
because McGarry allowed herself to get knocked up and produce a sprog.
Well, we should all applaud Cat Stewart for
an entertaining article.
This caught my eye;
“But for McGarry, is it right to jail a
mother with a toddler?”
If you follow that logic, female murderers
wouldn’t be locked up either, or does Cat wholeheartedly support the need to
imprison female murders?
I am going to say she would say okay to
female murderers doing prison.
Now let’s turn to this part:
“Mothers, in the vast majority of cases,
are primary care givers for children and a custodial sentence impacts
negatively and unfairly on family life”.
McGarry’s criminality is serious crime, of
course there is a negative impact on family life, but in this case, the
sentence is not unfair. This reminds me of the waffle spouted Albie Sachs,
arguably the world's most famous judge who wrongly made the judgment in South
Africa not to send a woman to prison because it would infringe the human
rights of her three children.
That bizarre decision was silly, based on
his emotion after hearing mitigation, that nonsense was even imported into
Scotland by someone doing the role of child commissioner.
Article 8 of Human Rights
Presumably, Cat Stewart should read 8.2.
“There shall be no interference by a public
authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with
the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national
security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the
prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for
the protection of the rights and freedoms of others”.
So, in this case, the human rights of
Natalie McGarry have been respected in full, in fact Sheriff Paul Crozier gave
her a light sentence of 18 months.
Did the ‘I have got a kid defence’ work for
Tommy Sheridan?
No, let’s get real here, if McGarry was a
crack head junkie from Possil, would this article have been written?
No!
McGarry was a public figure; the fact that
she has been treated to a prison cell shocks some people who are also public
figures.
Jail is for everyone, including people like
Natalie McGarry.
Finally, these types of bizarre articles are
entertaining, but in reality they don’t hold water, the saying nice to be nice
applies, but justice isn’t about being nice. It is about upholding one of the
cornerstones of society. Natalie McGarry did a lot of evil before she was
caught; we should focus on that and not her former celebrity.
I doubt there is much public support for
this type of virtue signalling.
Yours sincerely
George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow
University
4 comments:
She deserves it George in fact she should have had a few people up there shouting " Community Justice" as she walked into court :)
The fact she stole money destined for those who cant even afford to feed their kids make her despicable. How anyone can defend her is beyond reason.
In general cons/inmates dont take to kindly to folk who commit crimes like this, i'd be very surprised if she wasnt on protection right now .
This is a very good tip particularly to those fresh
to the blogosphere. Simple but very accurate information… Appreciate
your sharing this one. A must read article!
Freddy
that would have been a laugh
George
Post a Comment