Monday, September 11, 2006

Naseem Hamed

Wondered why I'd not had any comments on this but then discovered I'd forgotten to post it. Oh well, I've missed the boat but it's still worth a mention.

Naseem Hamed was released from prison last week after serving less than four months of his 15 month sentence. Am I the only one who thinks that if you get a 15 month sentence then you should be in prison for- let me think about this... 15 months. If you are well behaved in jail then you should come out after; I know... 15 months. If you have been naughty whilst in jail then you should stay until you do start to behave.

Anthony Burgin, who's car was was hit at 90 mph by Hamed is still a real mess. He suffered multiple broken bones and his wife was also seriously injured. They were hit whist Hamed was attempting to overtake another car- the driver of which, described the manouvre as 'suicidal'

Imagine how Mr and Mrs Burgin must have felt seeing the news coverage of the stretch limo arriving to pick up Hamed on his release.

24 comments:

Anonymous said...

If wish you were in charge of prisons but you are a) too 'right wing' b) too IT literate (!!).
Seriously I agree 100% with that. At very least Naseem Hamed should pay a lot of compensation.

Anonymous said...

if you get fifteen months in prison then you get out after seven and half months and serve the rest on licence, so the argument is why has he been let out in four rather than seven and half. Well we known the answer to that the prisons are full and space needs to be made by letting out those that are not a threat.
And on that ground it seems to me that Naseem Hamed is an obvious choice to be let out.
It was an accident, admittedly caused by the fact that he was a thoughtless egoistic prick but an accident nonetheless.
He isn't going to re-offend is he? nor is he going to be a burden on society nor go down to the pub and brag to his chav mates about how he beat the system.
I too hope that the unfortunate driver of the other car is amply compensated but I would sooner some one like him was let out early rather than some junkie desperate for a fix who is likely to burgle my house

Hill J said...

'He isn't going to re-offend?! He was banned in 1995 for three months for..wait for it, dangerous driving

Anonymous said...

Not likely to re-offend? How often do not only you, but me also (and I'm a bobby) drive over 30 mph in a 30 zone and so on?? I believe that 15 months means 15 months and life means life - we just need more prisons - maybe then some would become emptier when the criminals realise that your sentence means just what is passed down to you in court.... and more prisons would mean more people could be locked up!

ThePest said...

Not really a punishment for Hamed though is it? Dont think it'll make him think twice before driving like that again!
Where is the guy with every broken bone in his body broken, will be lucky if he gets his normal life back ever

PC Bloggs said...

I pulled someone over the other day for driving like, as anonymous put it, an "egoistic prick", doing about 50mph in a 30zone past a school and nearly hitting a child. When I checked his record, he had a previous conviction for causing death by dangerous driving. You would think killing someone might put a normal person off driving for good, but not this guy. He said, "Haven't you anything better to do?" Oh well, I suppose the police have too much paperwork to do to bother fannying about saving lives.
pcbloggs.blogspot.com

Anonymous said...

hill j was he banned for three months in 1995?, I don't know I'll assume that you are correct, perhaps if he had been more severely punished then he might have thought twice before the act of foolishness that got him in trouble the 2nd time (who knows)
anonymous (the cop) I too have been done for driving at 37 in a 30 zone.
I was caught I was punished, I learn't I've watched my speedo more carefully since.
You have absolutely no evidence to support your claim that he might re-offend. As I originally posted he is not some dimwit chav with a low regard for the law who will go out and carry on thieving without a second thought for the consequences.
I would imagine that what he has done will pray on his conciousness for a very long time, I hope so.
Your statement that we need more prisons is correct but flawed.
Extra prison spaces cannot be summoned out of thin air, so one of two things must be done in the meantime. Either execute a sufficient number of prisoners to reduce the pressure (an appealing but unrealistic possibility) or let some go.
And if some are let go then I would prefer someone like this than the vast number of thieving petty toerags I see around me every day.
Finally without wishing in any way to disparage the tragic situation of the other driver then his injuries are not and should be a factor in any decision to let Hamed out earlier. Though I agree that picking him up in a limo was an idiotic decision on someone's part.

H said...

Anonymous - what evidence do you have to support your claim that he is not some dimwit chav with a low regard for the law? He seems to behave like one. Money, fame and limos don't stop someone being stupid, selfish and irresponsible.

Anonymous said...

Touche h, you're right I don't, I've never met him and I presume you haven't either. So all I have to go on is what I see in the media (which is very prejudiced against him) However I would say looking at
it from the point of view of letting him out early the only relevant questions are risk of re-offending and will he be a burden on society and the answer to both questions is most likely no as far as I can see.
OK the reason he won't steal from grannies is because he's rich not because he's honest but it doesn't change the fact he won't rob old ladies. A lot of people seem to think he's had special treatment because he is rich and resent it.
As for the injuries suffered by Mr Burgin, I can understand that he is bitter, angry and resentful which is why he has no input into this decision. Like it or not these decisions need to be made objectively.
PC Bloggs I hope the book was thrown at the guy you caught (sadly I suspect it wasn't) but unless it actually was Naseem Hamed what has he got to do with this thread ?

Anonymous said...

According to BBC News
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/south_yorkshire/4764161.stm
Hamed had 4 previous convictions for speeding.
From the BBC report


"Naseem Hamed jailed for car crash
Naseem Hamed arriving at court with his wife Eleasha
Naseem Hamed arriving at court with his wife Eleasha
Former world boxing champion Naseem Hamed has been jailed for dangerous driving after a crash which left another driver severely injured.

Hamed, 32, from Dore in Sheffield, was sentenced to 15 months after pleading guilty at an earlier hearing. He was also given a four-year driving ban.

His £325,000 McLaren-Mercedes crashed at 90mph in Sheffield on 2 May 2005.

The judge criticised the DVLA for refusing to reveal that Hamed had been banned before for driving at 110mph.

The Honorary Recorder of Sheffield, Judge Alan Goldsack, told Hamed: "I find it astonishing that the DVLA has not been prepared to co-operate with the prosecution to give them details of your earlier offences - apparently on human rights grounds."

Anxious to impress

The DVLA's decision led to Hamed being sentenced at Sheffield Crown Court on Friday without the judge being told he had previously banned for a year for driving a Porsche at 110mph on the M1 in Derbyshire.

He also had three other previous convictions for speeding offences, details of which the prosecution had to find from court records. "

So it is fair to say he is a serial offender.
Anyone who drives badly and at excessive speed is a threat to public safety. Given several convictions this was not "a moment of madness"
I would rather have a petty thief released early than a dangerous driver. It was only good fortune, helped no doubt by modern car design and good medical treatment that meant the victim in this case wasn't killed.

Tom Welsh said...

The whole system is wrong through and through. As Frank says, if you are sentenced to 15 months, that is what you should serve - in prison. No letting you off half that time, because that's what the authorities really think you deserve, although they give you the longer sentence to impress the gullible public. No letting you out ASAP because there are not enough prison places, either. In that case, BUILD MORE PRISONS. And above all, no letting people go because "they are cured and see the error of their ways". Anyone with an IQ above their age can pull that one. Punishment is for the crime, not for your subsequent state of mind.

Allan Him said...

Anonymous, you said,

"However I would say looking at
it from the point of view of letting him out early the only relevant questions are risk of re-offending and will he be a burden on society..."

But what about real guilt and real punishment for it? If someone behaves wrongly and illegally, are they not locked up or fined or given community service or whatever because they deserve it, and not just to stop them re-offending?

Anonymous said...

Tom and Allan you are right in an ideal world a person sent to prison would serve a sentence that reflected their transgression and serve it in full.
This is not an ideal world and isn't going to become one any time soon or ever for that matter.
The prisons are full and the need to reduce pressure in them overrides any desire to make the punishment fit the crime. You may not like it, I certainly don't but it's reality.
Building more prisons is no more a realistic solution (for this case at least) than my suggestion of stringing some up to make room.
It will take at least a decade to create any more prison spaces.
Between the planning, the public objections by nimby's (many of whom are probably also demanding prisons be built, squabbles over budgets not to mention the actual construction it will be a long time.
In the meantime some have to be set free to make space and I stand by my claim that whoever made the decision to let Hamed out made the best one from a number of not very good choices.

Jamieson said...

Quite simple, really. School rolls are falling, prisons are filling up; so change the former schools into prisons! You would not even have to change the staff - I'm sure there are many teachers who would like to be screws, which is, after all, in their nature, anyway. And the faces wouldn't be that new either - "Hello Darren, come on in and make yourself conmfortable"!

Anonymous said...

He isn't going to be a burden on society? So, if he causes another crash, severely injuring more people due to his reckless driving, is that not going to cause a somewhat avoidable burden on the already stretched NHS?

15 months is 15 months - he should be made ot deal with it.If they are going ot le thim out early, give a shorter sentence instead of giving people the wrong impression by letting him out early.

Anonymous said...

Re the comment of 12.38 what possible correlation is there between the length of time
served and the likelihood of him causing another crash?
Hamed is what 32 - 33 yrs old ? He's going to be driving for another 40 yrs or so minus any ban imposed on
him.Do you really believe that keeping him in jail for seven and half months not four is a significant
enough percentage of that time to make any reduction in the odds of him causing any more accidents?

Tom Welsh said...

"Do you really believe that keeping him in jail for seven and half months not four is a significant
enough percentage of that time to make any reduction in the odds of him causing any more accidents?"

It'll certainly make a 100% reduction in the odds of him causing accidents during those extra three and a half months. By your logic, we might as well not punish him at all.

Anonymous said...

Why do we need to build more prisons ? Why can't some prisoners eg foreign nationals and lifers be offshored to Russia or some other 3rd world country ?

Anonymous said...

Well Tom considering he has been released from prison but not from his 4 yr driving ban then it makes no difference whether he is in prison or not with regards to the odds of him causing another accident does it?
No by my logic he would have been jailed for 15 months then released after seven and a half to serve the remaining half on license as he would have done were it not for the ludicrous state of our prison system. At no point have I suggested he should not be punished.
By your logic perhaps we should jail all criminals for the remainder of their natural lives whether it be for dangerous driving, TV license dodging or spitting in public. The argument that criminals cannot commit crimes whilst banged up is a valid one for crimes like sexual offences or burglary but to apply it in this case defies common-sense

Anonymous said...

i really do think he was wrong but u no wat he got out u all dnt have nothiing to do accept talk shit all day i really do feel sorry for the guy that was hurt but would everybody make this a big deal if it was a famous actor from america or are u all just mad cuz he is arab american

Vlad Reznik said...

Let me wonder, how did he get out early?

£££

I'm surprised that he was put inside in the first place!

jeff lacey said...

hmm...he should have got life...

Paddy Power said...

It's a shame...so talented yet he wasted it.

generic cialis said...

Hi, well be sensible, well-all described