Sarah Sands jailed for three and a half years for killing paedophile Michael Pleasted - Polidicks

[QUOTE]A woman has been sentenced to three-and-a-half years in prison for killing a man charged with sexually assaulting young boys on the east London estate where they lived. Sarah Sands, 32, was found guilty of the manslaughter of Michael Pleasted, 77, by reason of loss of control. Pleasted, who had previous convictions, was on bail awaiting trial when he was killed at his flat in east London. He was stabbed eight times and bled to death, the Old Bailey heard. Judge Nicholas Cooke QC said it was a "truly exceptional case" as he reduced her sentence from seven years to three-and-a-half, taking into consideration her position as a single mother. Sands, who was cleared of murder, had armed herself with a knife and carried out a "determined and sustained attack" on Pleasted at his flat in Canning Town, the court heard.[/QUOTE] [url]www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-34390935[/url]

Can't say I blame her, but the entire situation is unfortunate.

Should have received a longer sentence in my opinion, I don't see how "loss of control" can be argued when it was clearly premeditated; she went there with a knife, with the intent to do him harm. It's also perfectly possible that she killed a man who was innocent of the offences in question.

[QUOTE=Gishank;48787606]Should have received a longer sentence in my opinion, I don't see how "loss of control" can be argued when it was clearly premeditated; she went there with a knife, with the intent to do him harm. It's also perfectly possible that she killed a man who was innocent of the offences in question.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE][I]He served sentences of between nine months and six years for sex crimes that included indecent assaults on a boys aged under 16 and under 14. However, he was not on the sex offenders register as he committed his offences before it was introduced in 1997.[/I][/QUOTE] I can tell you for one thing that this man was far from innocent...

I call this sentence a result of 'single mother privilege'.

I'm conflicted. On one hand, I want to congratulate this woman for ridding the world of a monster. On the other hand, she killed a human.

[QUOTE=J$ Psychotic;48787696]I'm conflicted. On one hand, I want to congratulate this woman for ridding the world of a monster. On the other hand, she killed a human.[/QUOTE] I concur.

The guy was already awaiting trial. There was no need for vigilante justice, because the [I]actual[/I] justice system was already at work. Unless there's something important that's not in the summary, like if he was still molesting kids while on bail.

Yeah no nothing noble or worth applauding about somebody stabbing an elder awaiting trial to death, leaving her two kids with nobody to take care of them while she's in jail. I wouldn't give her a longer sentence because it's not like that would help anything, but she's still a fuckup.

I don't get how this is manslaughter. She's a murderer.

That's really short for such a brutal murder.

[QUOTE=itisjuly;48787868]I don't get how this is manslaughter. She's a murderer.[/QUOTE] Yeah - I don't have a problem with short sentences as such, but calling it manslaughter is just a joke. Pleated might be a monster, but he never killed anyone - still he has served a 6-year sentence at one point. On the other hand, I don't see the use in putting her in prison for 25 years.

So she intentionally murdered him in his apartment and only got three and a half years? That's fucking terrible.

[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;48787906]On the other hand, I don't see the use in putting her in prison for 25 years.[/QUOTE] I think the original 7 year sentence fit well. But, I dunno. Terrible situation.

[QUOTE=Gishank;48787606]Should have received a longer sentence in my opinion, I don't see how "loss of control" can be argued when it was clearly premeditated; she went there with a knife, with the intent to do him harm. It's also perfectly possible that she killed a man who was innocent of the offences in question.[/QUOTE] He was a fucking pedophile, woman deserves a medal.

[QUOTE=NeverGoWest;48787953]He was a fucking pedophile, woman deserves a medal.[/QUOTE] No, she does not. We have a system of law and justice for a reason. This vigilante take law into your own hands crap is really bad for a modern society.

[QUOTE=J$ Psychotic;48787696]I'm conflicted. On one hand, I want to congratulate this woman for ridding the world of a monster. On the other hand, she killed a human.[/QUOTE] The entire concept of blind justice exists so that vigilantes can't get away with killing whoever they please, even if the whoever turns out to be a mean old shitbag with a history of sexual assault. Like okay she killed a living heap of trash but that heap of trash turns out to have the same rights as everyone else. Doesn't mean I'll feel sorry for the guy, but she deserves to be sent to jail all the same.

[QUOTE=NeverGoWest;48787953]He was a fucking pedophile, woman deserves a medal.[/QUOTE] He was a fucking pedophile who was already awaiting trial for his crimes. Like someone else already said, there was no need for vigilante justice when the actual justice system was already taking care of him. Though I guess if the actual justice system called this a "manslaughter" and gave a murderer only three years in prison, maybe she was onto something there.

[QUOTE=Shugo;48788015] Though I guess if the actual justice system called this a "manslaughter" and gave a murderer only three years in prison, maybe she was onto something there.[/QUOTE] Agreed This weird sentence only shows that she was right

This was pre-mediated murder. It doesnt really matter that its a pedophile who has done shit before, it was still 1 person pre-planning the killing of another and doing it. The pedo was fucked up and a monster, but this case is very bias due to that fact. I mean fucking manslaughter and 3 years for premediated murder? Stabbed 8 times? If it were HER kids who were molested then id be on her side and the laws side 100% of the way. I dont even have an issue with the sentence, but her only getting "Manslaughter" for something like that is stupid as fuck.

its like you people expect robotic, perfectly conformed reactions to every conceivable crime or wrongdoing and then call a the mother "'single mother privileged" you don't realize how badly this can screw a kid up, do you? its not as simple as "oh he should get therapy" , this shit would permanently warp someones behavior. Judging from how it all went down, she did not go there with the knife at first to kill him, but it escalated. [read the friggin article] The judge nailed it: [QUOTE]He said: "There must never be the slightest encouragement for mob rule." The judge added: "This was a case in which the defendant promptly gave herself up to the police in a highly stressed state, never disputed responsibility for the killing as a matter of fact, did not take the opportunity to get rid of evidence and demonstrated remorse."[/QUOTE] She then states to the jury: [QUOTE]Sands told the jury she was "frightened", adding: "It was not how it was meant to go. He was meant to listen to me". Pleasted "smirked" when he answered the door and told her the boys were all liars who had ruined his life.[/QUOTE] There were also allegations of another kid just very recently, hes a creep and the Mother, while the entire thing is regrettable, is not a bloodthirsty vigilante hellbent on shortcutting every trial nor should she be treated as one. There's one thing that is showed time and time again that people forget because its mostly demonstrated in the wild: Mothers get extremely angry, whether its for the better or not. The entire thing is horrible, but it doesn't break my heart to see the bastard gone.

[QUOTE=Incoming.;48788130]its like you people expect robotic, perfectly conformed reactions to every conceivable crime or wrongdoing and then call a the mother "'single mother privileged" you don't realize how badly this can screw a kid up, do you? its not as simple as "oh he should get therapy" , this shit would permanently warp someones behavior. Judging from how it all went down, she did not go there with the knife at first to kill him, but it escalated. [read the friggin article] The judge nailed it: She then states to the jury: There were also allegations of another kid just very recently, hes a creep and the Mother, while the entire thing is regrettable, is not a bloodthirsty vigilante hellbent on shortcutting every trial nor should she be treated as one. There's one thing that is showed time and time again that people forget because its mostly demonstrated in the wild: Mothers get extremely angry, whether its for the better or not. The entire thing is horrible, but it doesn't break my heart to see the bastard gone.[/QUOTE] Its a pretty tough situation, it reminds me a lot of the video of the Dad who shoots his kids child molester+kidnapper and kills him. Was all preplanned, he was waiting their, its on video even. I just think "manslaughter" for something like this is completely the wrong label. That said being labeled a murderer would completely ruin her life, but she DID kill someone, but that someone was a fucked up monster who had ruined other lives. NSFW, guy gets shot and dies. [video=youtube;Oi3Hyxuf5AE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oi3Hyxuf5AE[/video] I dont think the mothers a bad person, just let her emotions get the best of her.

[QUOTE=Incoming.;48788130]Sands told the jury she was "frightened", adding: "It was not how it was meant to go. He was meant to listen to me". Pleasted "smirked" when he answered the door and told her the boys were all liars who had ruined his life.[/QUOTE] That still sounds like second-degree murder to me. She went there with preparations to kill him, but not intent. It is a British criminal system though, maybe their "manslaughter" is more like our "murder in the second degree".

[QUOTE=HoodedSniper;48788214]I dont think the mothers a bad person, just let her emotions get the best of her.[/QUOTE] Ding ding ding we have a winner! Does she deserve punishment? YES. Does she deserve to be burned at the stake for human emotion? NO. oh, and in response to the above: Would you willingly approach someone this twisted unarmed? I wouldn't. I can bet you she went there to threaten him into pleading guilty, and it spiraled out of control. She didn't have him open the door and instantly stab him to death, there was a conversation. It fits perfectly into the statements, too. "You plead guilty or I'll find you." "Why should I? The kids are liars." He effectively called his own death on the spot.

[QUOTE=NeverGoWest;48787953]He was a fucking pedophile, woman deserves a medal.[/QUOTE] what the hell lmao [editline]29th September 2015[/editline] you remind me of those people who post on their facebook walls with photos of guillotines and 'kill all pedophiles' edited over

This whole situation is more of a giant grey area. Neither side is innocent basically.

[QUOTE=Deathtrooper2;48788276]This whole situation is more of a giant grey area. Neither side is innocent basically.[/QUOTE] no it isnt? judicial system decides what happens to this man, not the woman. she's entirely at fault and completely guilty

[QUOTE=Deathtrooper2;48788276]This whole situation is more of a giant grey area. Neither side is innocent basically.[/QUOTE] What grey area? What the fuck are you talking about? It's straight up murder. There's nothing grey about this.

[QUOTE=.Lain;48788293]no it isnt? judicial system decides what happens to this man, not the woman. she's entirely at fault and completely guilty[/QUOTE] Which she admitted to, and complied with police 100%. The law system appreciates that, if she ran the verdict would be worse. Where is the incentive to cooperate if someone who gives themselves up is treated like a murdering psychopath with no thought for action? [QUOTE=itisjuly;48788296]What grey area? What the fuck are you talking about? It's straight up murder. There's nothing grey about this.[/QUOTE] holy shit it wasn't as premeditated as you'd think Besides, if prison is meant to rehabilitate, then what she was given should be enough. I guess you forgot the rehabilitate part. If she is thrown in for 20 years she will get released with unthinkably worse habits and psyche more than a rehabilitation.

[QUOTE=.Lain;48788293]no it isnt? judicial system decides what happens to this man, not the woman. she's entirely at fault and completely guilty[/QUOTE] If you would take a minute at actually looking at what i typed. This is what i meant. The man was proven guilty, he was a pedophile, in other words everyone hates him. But he was waiting judgement anyways so he was going to get punished anyways. So he's is guilty. The woman on the other hand killed the man in revenge of the people who he molested or possibly murdered. But she is also guilty of murdering the man, but is she truly evil, or just a mother blinded by her own emotions? Thats what i mean its a grey area, the man was guilty, the woman is also guilty, but i wouldn't really call the woman "evil".