This article is from November 17th, so a couple days old, but I found it worthwhile.
Am I gonna cry for this moron? Not one tear.
Is this punishment reasonable? Fuck, I just don’t know man…
I’m with you tbh. For context: Here in Germany this is the reason that offenders have a right to privacy, so their faces and their full names aren’t allowed to be shown / named (in german media).
This regulation has its own issues imo, but makes sense in this case: The offender gets punished, but they don’t have to suffer their whole life for it.
100% suspended sentence is correct. What he did is bad but he shouldn’t be taking up a cell in overflowing prisons.
Suspended essentially means no more public order offences so hopefully behaves
Absolutely, yes.
He got a 3-month custodial sentence. Convictions resulting in custodial sentences shorter than 12 months become ‘spent’ 12 months after the sentence ends. So, his conviction will be ‘unspent’ for the next 15 months.
While his conviction is ‘unspent’ he still only needs to tell an organisation about it (e.g. for a job application) if they ask him, but it will show up on any DBS - basic, standard or enhanced.
After it becomes ‘spent’ it will only show up on a standard or enhanced DBS check. He only needs to tell a potential employer, university or college about it if they ask him to and they tell him the role needs a standard or enhanced DBS check and it has not been removed (‘filtered’) from DBS certificates (as it resulted in a custodial sentence, it can’t ever be filtered).
It’s against the law for an employer, university or college to refuse someone a role because they’ve got a spent conviction or caution, unless it makes them unsuitable for the role (i.e. a driving conviction might make them unsuitable for a job as a driving instructor).
