SVR coaches vandalised

One LNER Teak and one other coach have been covered in graffiti.


Will post later photos

 

Don’t post photos. That’s what these morons want - their ‘work’ to be seen by as many people as possible.

Just remove it as quickly as possible, and hopefully these idiots will see they are wasting their time if they hoped to see these coaches travelling up and down the line like this.

 

Unfortunately the pictures are already on Facebook, in the SVR's apology for short trains.

 

There is also a link to the Face page in the SVR thread about this.

 

Shame. I know at least one railway (SDR I think) has an official policy of not publishing any photos of graffiti damage. Very sensible I think.

 

Tricky one though, what do you do if you have an attack like the NYMR did and your asking for people to put their hand in their pockets to help you out? A few pictures to show what damage has been done and what needs to be done to put it right certainly helped out their appeal.

 

Giving the culprits (if they can be caught) a good thrashing would be too good for them, but it might just stop them doing it again!!!

 

automatic jail might make them think twice.It was a pretty poor effort too.

 

It is, the pendulum has swung too far in the name of human rights and scumbags aren't deterred by an Official Caution or an ASBO .Hit them with a sentence or if under age penalise the parents.

 

Not sure how it works in the rest of Europe but in Portugal in the case of criminal damage the culprits are presented with the bill or their parents, if under age. The debt remains until it is paid off so no credit rating until you do and I believe there is a facility to deduct regular amounts from wages as directed by the courts.
I would prefer it if people didn't refer to this sort of thing as graffiti, it's only that if you have permission otherwise it's criminal damage.

 

Agree about some of the punishments handed down by some judges, perhaps said judges should be locked up to make them dish out suitable punishments?

 

The courts can only work within the guidelines that they are given.

 

What is the betting that none of them have jobs, in which case you would never get any of the money back.

Fully agree that this is criminal damage.

 

many young offenders seem to me to get a Police Caution instead of being prosecuted which they no doubt see as getting away with it ie no deterrent value.

 

Often I believe some judges make up the rules as they go along, even telling our MPs that what they passed in the house is against the law! So if MPs pass laws that can be ruled illegal by our wonderful (???) judges , so who really makes the laws of this country?

 

There's a world of difference between the role of the High Court and above which is to interpret the law and prevent Parliament enforcing laws it didnt actually write - in other words its not the judges fault if Parliament makes a horlicks of writing the law and ends up with something which says something other than they intended. That is a historic part of our legal system and unwritten constitution in that a significant part of our legal system derives from court precedent rather than Acts of Parliament - although of course Parliament can take something which has developed through court precedent and codify it in an Act of Parliament - with amendments if appropriate.

In terms of magistrates courts that would generally deal with minor acts like criminal damage - there is a strict set of sentancing guidelines for each type of offence - usually a band so that the worst gets most punished where as something with mitigating circumstances can be given a lower sentance. A presiding magistrate cannot just decide to sentance someone to life for criminal damage because they want to. Similarly they shouldn't be letting someone off too lightly either. There is obviously a balance - we might want all criminals locked up regardless of how minor the crime but few of us want to pay for that level of jail capacity nor have the jails on our doorstep either. Pathetic and heartbreaking as this damage is, I wouldn't be that keen on a jail sentance. I'd far rather go for something positive like being sentanced to paint a mile of railings to an acceptable standard, or clear a mile of riverbank of litter - in other words something based on identifiable positive results rather than on time served which can easily be wasted.

(Edit to add - and they'd also be on risk that if some low life littered the riverbank or damaged the railings before they got inspected, they'd have to do it all again - might teach them how others feel!).

 

Firstly a proposals that parents be made liable for damage caused by minors was dropped when it was realised that a large number of children would end up dumped by parents into care so the taxpayer would end up with the bill. In any event unless there was some sort of actual fault or privity how can you hold one person liable for the act of another outside of employees?

Secondly there was concern in one of the Nordic countries where a similar rule applied that offenders could end up owing huge amounts they had no hope of ever repaying and which could deter offenders from 'going straight'

If I might add a further suggestion to the discussion I suggest that some sort of 'remission for good conduct' eg getting back into education or regular employment should be a feature of any justice system.

 

It's sometimes better to publish photos of their 'work', as these people have an individual 'tag' which can be used to identify them. We had a graffiti attack at Llangollen some years ago & the culprit was caught when a North Wales police officer in Prestatyn recognised his tag.

Bob.

 

now being reported by the BBC
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hereford-worcester-42484761

Colin