Hull's top judge wants tougher sentences for child abductors
Hull's top judge is calling on Parliament to look at tougher sentences for child abductors.
Judge Michael Mettyear sentenced Daniel Banasik to four-and-a-half years in prison yesterday for trying to snatch a young boy at Hull Fair.
-
Judge Michael Mettyear
But Judge Mettyear said he felt his hands were tied due to the maximum sentence for child abduction being seven years.
The charge also prevented him from being able to place Daniel Banasik on the sex offenders register.
0% selling fees when you sell your property through auction with Whitakers Estate Agents. We have had huge succes and have achieved 100% sale rate at the last auction. Call today to find out more
Contact: 01482 428592
Valid until: Friday, May 31 2013
He said: "It is somewhat surprising that the maximum sentence allowed for this offence is only seven years. Had it been attempted kidnap, it would have been life.
"Maybe Parliament wants to think again about the appropriate maximum for this offence.
"Certainly, I have felt constrained in determining what the proper sentence should be.
"Not only have I felt frustrated by the low maximum for this but I also cannot order you to sign the sex offenders register as it does not apply to this act."
18 Comments
View all
by Hunnyb_2252
Monday, March 11 2013, 7:22AM
“If the EU have anything to do with it Judge Mettyear won't get the increased prison term he asks for. Even if it is granted, the EU are so dithery it'll take another 18 months to two years before it'll come into force. Meanwhile, some little scroat will sieze another child and possibly murder the little lamb and all because the law in this country is a total ass!!”
by tonyhull
Sunday, March 10 2013, 10:21PM
“to say he went not guilty was found unaminously guilty 4.5 years means the judge must have put things in favour of this ***** otherwise why not 7?”
by beckster07
Sunday, March 10 2013, 9:30PM
“you could have give him 7 you retard what about the other joke sentences....”
by ArthurHunt
Sunday, March 10 2013, 2:15PM
“Four and a half years really means two and a quarter as no one serves the sentence passed by the courts any more. Allowing for all the usual liberal/Marxist-lite/Fabian society/common purpose lefty propaganda about 'rights' and other cr*p, plus the usual 'saving money' mantra the scum will be out in I reckon 18 months - under the cover of darkness when no one is looking.
I totally support the judges comments that Parliament should (if it's allowed to any more under EU law) increase sentences. If the government wants to save money how about 12 feet of rope and a long drop for child abductors? Put it to a vote it's called democracy... Can't you hear the liberals screech - ooooh but we can't do that what about the abductors 'rights'....
My answer is we can do what we like, it's OUR country and OUR voice should prevail.
See to it Cameron before we see to you... oh but you're held back by Clegg and the wishy-washy brigade... so it's Carry on regardless.”
by glen1954
Sunday, March 10 2013, 2:09PM
“The sentence should be death for all child abductors !!!!”
by hullbloke81_
Saturday, March 09 2013, 11:39PM
“If the maximum sentence for this offence is seven years then why wasnt he given that seven years,judge mettyear should of set an example with banasik. The judges can only give the maximum sentence permitted which is not the way it should be ,every case should be judged on its own merits leaving the judge to handout a sentence that suits the crime with no restrictions. This however wouldnt stop some dithering old sod from handing out a far to leniante sentence to some little scroat, and as for serving a lesser term in prison just because you say sorry well sorry is easy to say if its going to knock time of your sentence.If a judge gives say six years but you only need to serve half that well why give the six years in the first place.”
by Hunnyb_2252
Saturday, March 09 2013, 3:59PM
“Yes, the punishment should fit the crime and in this case it's a vile crime involving children. We as parents, grandparents and the law have to protect them as they cannot protect themselves. Give this scum his full sentence, put him on the sex register and fit a tag on him when he's released, he's a danger to all children. What's been done about his friends? If he's in jail, they may carry on where he's left off, God help the poor kids of this city!!”
by archieboden
Saturday, March 09 2013, 3:51PM
“A worry that this man could be out in the forseeable future, How many times have we read that such people have gone on to commit even more serious offences. He will have a comfortable life in a segregation unit for a couple of years, everything provided, dentists,doctors, best food, you name it.”
by VicMay
Saturday, March 09 2013, 3:07PM
“The top sentence was seven years, so why not use seven years as he failed to reveal the other gang members.”
by Janet1234
Saturday, March 09 2013, 2:24PM
“This story is chilling and I dont mean to cause unnecessary concern but according to statistical evidence gathered in the US, stereotypical kidnappings, defined as abductions perpetrated by a stranger or slight acquaintance and involving a child. In 40 percent of stereotypical kidnappings, the child was killed. Nearly half of all child victims of stereotypical kidnappings and nonfamily abductions were sexually assaulted by the perpetrator.
In this particular case this man is going to be back on our streets probably within two years!! ... not much of a deterrent for other would be vile, evil perpetrators is it? Snatching a five year old child from a mothers hands in public shows these people mean business. We need to toughen up, this man should have been locked up for a very long time to set an example to others that the safety of our children is taken very seriously.”