Groups

    Should this Judge not be sacked ?

    I ask the above as I can't understand how this monster can get bail for such horrid acts against kids/babies.The Judge is obviously not fit to Judge.
    You can be refused bail for shoplifting..............

    +++++++++++++++++++

    A MAN is to stand trial charged with sexually abusing a baby - when he was just a day old.

    Stuart Young, 37, faced the allegation during a hearing today at the High Court in Glasgow.

    It is claimed that on various occasions between April and July last year at properties in Edinburgh, Young abused the child and did rape him.

    The boy is said to have been aged between a day and three months at the time.

    Young is also accused of raping a young girl in Edinburgh. The allegations spans November 2008 and December 2013.

    The girl was aged between six months and five years old. Young then faces a separate charge of assaulting her.

    The indictment also claims Young sexually abused a nine year-old girl in 2013 in the capital.

    Young faces a further charge of assaulting a woman and another allegation under the Children and Young Persons Act.

    Young, of Sighthill, Edinburgh, denies the charges.

    Judge Lord Turnbull set a trial due to start next April. The case is expected to last around seven days.

    Young's bail was continued until then.

    dailyrecord.co.uk/new…747

    57 Comments

    Banned

    Whats the law on bail in Scotland?
    From what you've posted he was already on bail, in England its not easy for a court to refuse bail when previously granted, is it different in Scotland?

    You or I could be wrongfully accused by a malicious partner. It does happen.

    I agree that the charges are varied and serious enough to warrant him being held until the trial but I have no idea of the capacity of the prison service in Scotland and whether they have to allow him his freedom.

    I would be concerned that with such serious charges he would be at risk of doing a runner.

    The judge is an idiot but I suppose it's down to the prosecutors and police to prove that he needs to be detained.

    Although I wouldn't wish any further offences on any child by Stuart Young I do hope that if he does re-offend that the judge, the prosecutor and the police officer giving evidence get sentenced for aiding and abetting or if Stuart Young does re-offend it's with the judges children or grandchildren.

    Yes criticise me but it's the only way these people in "authority" will learn and justice will mean justice.

    Original Poster

    davey369

    Whats the law on bail in Scotland?From what you've posted he was already … Whats the law on bail in Scotland?From what you've posted he was already on bail, in England its not easy for a court to refuse bail when previously granted, is it different in Scotland?

    He's already on bail for a separate charge of assaulting a very young girl as it shows in Opening post.

    Hes not been found guilty, has he?

    Banned

    Execution is too good for the likes of him, if found incontrovertibly guilty. I don't see why time and time again, like that doctor the other day we give out 20 year sentences (at the expense of the tax payer) - then let them out in half of that. They won't change, it is part of them. Get rid of them, then they won't hurt anyone ever again. Makes you sick.
    Edited by: "Musician" 4th Dec 2014

    Banned

    philphil61

    The judge is an idiot but I suppose it's down to the prosecutors and … The judge is an idiot but I suppose it's down to the prosecutors and police to prove that he needs to be detained.Although I wouldn't wish any further offences on any child by Stuart Young I do hope that if he does re-offend that the judge, the prosecutor and the police officer giving evidence get sentenced for aiding and abetting or if Stuart Young does re-offend it's with the judges children or grandchildren.Yes criticise me but it's the only way these people in "authority" will learn and justice will mean justice.



    That is an incredibly horrendous thing to wish upon someone else. You need to control your vile thoughts. How would you like it if someone wished this upon your children for wishing it upon others. It was a stupendous comment to make, for which you should be throughly ashamed.

    There could be various reasons for the decision. The judges hands could be judicially tied. Have you established all the facts? You say justice, so you've condemned the man already before his trial. I disagree with having any tom, dick and harry as a member of jury, because potentially you could end up with someone like you on the bench.

    If anyone is under suspicion for such a serious crime they need to be held in remand, this is beyond lunacy when you consider the fact shoplifters and burglars are held in remand under suspicion!!

    Yes, we need to protect innocent people, but there needs to be a line in the sand!

    Any alleged sex crimes involving children need to be treated on a different level than shoplifting and petty burglary for gods sake!!

    philphil61

    if Stuart Young does re-offend it's with the judges children or … if Stuart Young does re-offend it's with the judges children or grandchildren.



    What a messed up view. Really messed up.

    Banned



    wow, I think that is one of the sickest comments I've seen on here.

    philphil61

    if Stuart Young does re-offend it's with the judges children or … if Stuart Young does re-offend it's with the judges children or grandchildren.

    davey369

    Whats the law on bail in Scotland?From what you've posted he was already … Whats the law on bail in Scotland?From what you've posted he was already on bail, in England its not easy for a court to refuse bail when previously granted, is it different in Scotland?


    Which pre-dated the initial charge. Like it or not, assuming the laws are the same in Scotland as they are in England (which you haven't commented on) then that wouldnt be grounds for refusing bail. I suspect if it was something that happened after the arrest then the outcome would be different.
    Not sure why you think the judge is to blame? What did the prosecution say? Did they request a remand in custody? The judge has his hands tied, you know, with that thing called, the law. Why didnt the police refuse bail, why wasn't the remand into custody done at earlier hearings? Not sure why you think this judge is to blame?

    Original Poster

    moob

    Hes not been found guilty, has he?


    davey369

    Which pre-dated the initial charge. Like it or not, assuming the laws are … Which pre-dated the initial charge. Like it or not, assuming the laws are the same in Scotland as they are in England (which you haven't commented on) then that wouldnt be grounds for refusing bail. I suspect if it was something that happened after the arrest then the outcome would be different.Not sure why you think the judge is to blame? What did the prosecution say? Did they request a remand in custody? The judge has his hands tied, you know, with that thing called, the law. Why didnt the police refuse bail, why wasn't the remand into custody done at earlier hearings? Not sure why you think this judge is to blame?

    My understanding of the case is that the guy is still on bail from the girl assault & then gets arrested again while on bail for rapinging another baby,but the judge gives him bail again ?
    That can't be correct is it ?

    Original Poster

    Ourcountryourvoteourrules

    If anyone is under suspicion for such a serious crime they need to be … If anyone is under suspicion for such a serious crime they need to be held in remand, this is beyond lunacy when you consider the fact shoplifters and burglars are held in remand under suspicion!! Yes, we need to protect innocent people, but there needs to be a line in the sand! Any alleged sex crimes involving children need to be treated on a different level than shoplifting and petty burglary for gods sake!!

    This is my understanding as well,so not sure why people are saying he has a right to bale ;-/

    Banned

    moob

    Hes not been found guilty, has he?

    davey369

    Which pre-dated the initial charge. Like it or not, assuming the laws … Which pre-dated the initial charge. Like it or not, assuming the laws are the same in Scotland as they are in England (which you haven't commented on) then that wouldnt be grounds for refusing bail. I suspect if it was something that happened after the arrest then the outcome would be different.Not sure why you think the judge is to blame? What did the prosecution say? Did they request a remand in custody? The judge has his hands tied, you know, with that thing called, the law. Why didnt the police refuse bail, why wasn't the remand into custody done at earlier hearings? Not sure why you think this judge is to blame?



    Where did you read that? He might have been arrested for them both at the same time but they only got the evidence for the second one recently. Regardless it pre-dates the initial charge so probably wouldnt affect the bail issue. Unless you know whats been said or dome, you cant blame the judge, although thats not to say he isnt to blame. The prosecution might not have even requested the remand to be in custody.

    Banned

    WheresMeNuts

    This is my understanding as well,so not sure why people are saying he has … This is my understanding as well,so not sure why people are saying he has a right to bale ;-/



    Everyone has the right to bail. If you replace these charges with shoplifting or burglary, with no previous offences, bail or court ordered breaches, I'll bet you cant find any refused bail.

    There could be really strict conditions placed on the bail too, again though its all guesswork unless there s more reports?

    dtovey89

    What a messed up view. Really messed up.



    Why is it messed up?

    What would happen if it was yet another social services or city council fiasco?

    Rather than causing more suffering to the innocent shouldn't we protect them?

    As I said in my comment both the prosecutor and the police have failed but the judge still has the ultimate
    responsibility (if he/she isn't happy with the court process (ie the bail) he/she has a duty/responsibility to challenge the process...that's why they are called judge (suggest you read the definition) - like everyone has a duty to protect the innocent children of this world.

    Yes maybe my words are harsh but why should anyone else suffer other than those who have the power to do something positive! - Stuart Young was already on bail (as per the news article) and in my opinion it doesn't matter if he committed the additional before or during his current bail offence(s). He is a danger to the innocent child and the innocent child needs to be protected and if that means detaining him until he is convicted or discharged then so be it.

    There are other less serious offences whereby those waiting court on charges are detained yet they didn't detain Stuart Young. So if anyone is to blame it's the judge, the prosecutor and the police and if anyone should suffer (other than the innocent victims it's these people because they've failed to do their duty.

    philphil61

    Why is it messed up?Yes maybe my words are harsh but why should anyone … Why is it messed up?Yes maybe my words are harsh but why should anyone else suffer other than those who have the power to do something positive!



    Why isn't it messed up?

    You've stated that if he attacks again then you hope it's the children or Grandchildren of the judge, etc.

    A truly sickening remark to make. No child deserves that. Regardless who they are related to the are still innocent.

    The Mods should really look into one of the most shocking posts I've seen on here and act accordingly.

    dtovey89

    Why isn't it messed up? You've stated that if he attacks again then you … Why isn't it messed up? You've stated that if he attacks again then you hope it's the children or Grandchildren of the judge, etc. A truly sickening remark to make. No child deserves that. Regardless who they are related to the are still innocent. The Mods should really look into one of the most shocking posts I've seen on here and act accordingly.



    You missed the point

    The judge, the prosecutor and the police have failed in their duty to protect other innocent children so if he re-offends again who would you prefer it to happen to?

    Report my comment I don't care - people in positions of authority should learn to take responsibility and in this current climate it seems if you have power/high position/responsibility - you'll get a bonus not a punishment. If it was an ordinary social worker or nurse or whatever to blame - they'd be dismissed without pay.

    Banned

    What an unfortunate surname this man has.

    What's more unfortunate is that some in here would base this alone to condemn him before his just day in court.

    Original Poster

    davey369

    Everyone has the right to bail. If you replace these charges with … Everyone has the right to bail. If you replace these charges with shoplifting or burglary, with no previous offences, bail or court ordered breaches, I'll bet you cant find any refused bail.There could be really strict conditions placed on the bail too, again though its all guesswork unless there s more reports?

    Everyone does not have a right to bail if they are classed as a danger or possible danger to others.
    The guy is out on bail for rape on 2 different kids done (allegedly) over 5 years & so this guy should never have been given bail.........Full stop !!

    philphil61

    You missed the pointThe judge, the prosecutor and the police have failed … You missed the pointThe judge, the prosecutor and the police have failed in their duty to protect other innocent children so if he re-offends again who would you prefer it to happen to?Report my comment I don't care - people in positions of authority should learn to take responsibility and in this current climate it seems if you have power/high position/responsibility - you'll get a bonus not a punishment. If it was an ordinary social worker or nurse or whatever to blame - they'd be dismissed without pay.



    You still don't get it.

    Wishing for a child to get raped to spite a parent or Grandparent is disgusting and cannot be justified.

    Banned

    philphil61

    if Stuart Young does re-offend it's with the judges children or … if Stuart Young does re-offend it's with the judges children or grandchildren.

    Yes maybe my words are harsh but why should anyone else suffer other than … Yes maybe my words are harsh but why should anyone else suffer other than those who have the power to do something positive!

    Stuart Young was already on bail (as per the news article) and in my … Stuart Young was already on bail (as per the news article) and in my opinion it doesn't matter if he committed the additional before or during his current bail offence(s). He is a danger to the innocent child and the innocent child needs to be protected and if that means detaining him until he is convicted or discharged then so be it.

    There are other less serious offences whereby those waiting court on … There are other less serious offences whereby those waiting court on charges are detained yet they didn't detain Stuart Young. So if anyone is to blame it's the judge, the prosecutor and the police and if anyone should suffer (other than the innocent victims it's these people because they've failed to do their duty.


    no you didnt, you said The judge is an idiot but I suppose it's down to the prosecutors and police to prove that he needs to be detained.



    So raping the judges grandchildren? How do they have the power to do anything? You're sick.


    so complain about the bail act, not hope that children of the judge are raped because he's following the law.


    Ok, simply, please explain which part of the law has not been followed in this case. The law is there for a reason, and almost everytime it works well, maybe in this case it hasn't but I've yet to see anything the judge has done wrong?

    Banned

    dtovey89

    Why isn't it messed up? You've stated that if he attacks again then you … Why isn't it messed up? You've stated that if he attacks again then you hope it's the children or Grandchildren of the judge, etc. A truly sickening remark to make. No child deserves that. Regardless who they are related to the are still innocent. The Mods should really look into one of the most shocking posts I've seen on here and act accordingly.



    I couldnt find the words to report the comment adequately. Truly formidable thoughts.

    Original Poster

    maxim24

    What an unfortunate surname this man has. What's more unfortunate is that … What an unfortunate surname this man has. What's more unfortunate is that some in here would base this alone to condemn him before his just day in court.

    So if he lived next door to you then you would be happy that he's out on bail with your kids only feet away :-/
    It's a serious risk & one no adult (Judge included) should be allowed to take by allowing this man bail.
    I guess as we like to be soooooooo PC in this country it's ok to allow him freedom until proven guilty or innocent & just hope he does not get hold of another child until that court date FFS..

    [/quote]

    The Mods should really look into one of the most shocking posts I've seen on here and act accordingly.[/quote]

    Why? It's someone's opinion, just because you don't like it - they're still entitled to it

    WheresMeNuts

    So if he lived next door to you then you would be happy that he's out on … So if he lived next door to you then you would be happy that he's out on bail with your kids only feet away :-/It's a serious risk & one no adult (Judge included) should be allowed to take by allowing this man bail.I guess as we like to be soooooooo PC in this country it's ok to allow him freedom until proven guilty or innocent & just hope he does not get hold of another child until that court date FFS..



    Glad you understand my point

    Yes I wouldn't wish anything to happen to any child (sad other people think differently) but it's a risk they (the court process) have created and if it had to happen to anyone then why should it be anyone "in the neighbourhood"... why is this so difficult for others to understand??????

    Banned

    WheresMeNuts

    Everyone does not have a right to bail if they are classed as a danger or … Everyone does not have a right to bail if they are classed as a danger or possible danger to others.The guy is out on bail for rape on 2 different kids done (allegedly) over 5 years & so this guy should never have been given bail.........Full stop !!


    Can you highlight the section of the bail act that supports this view, and what the prosecution said in court at the bail hearing in this case, or link to the extra info you have about the case please?

    Banned

    WheresMeNuts

    So if he lived next door to you then you would be happy that he's out on … So if he lived next door to you then you would be happy that he's out on bail with your kids only feet away :-/It's a serious risk & one no adult (Judge included) should be allowed to take by allowing this man bail.I guess as we like to be soooooooo PC in this country it's ok to allow him freedom until proven guilty or innocent & just hope he does not get hold of another child until that court date FFS..


    Were there any bail conditions imposed in court?

    Banned

    WheresMeNuts

    So if he lived next door to you then you would be happy that he's out on … So if he lived next door to you then you would be happy that he's out on bail with your kids only feet away :-/It's a serious risk & one no adult (Judge included) should be allowed to take by allowing this man bail.I guess as we like to be soooooooo PC in this country it's ok to allow him freedom until proven guilty or innocent & just hope he does not get hold of another child until that court date FFS..



    Things appear to be stacked against him, but we do not know exactly the thought process behind the judges actions. Unless you have developed telepathic abilities or had a conversation with him. It seems like an angry mob mentality and ive read some of your comments on other threads before and you come across as a hot headed individual.

    Original Poster

    davey369

    Can you highlight the section of the bail act that supports this view, … Can you highlight the section of the bail act that supports this view, and what the prosecution said in court at the bail hearing in this case, or link to the extra info you have about the case please?

    You can only go on by what you read.
    A court case in Scotland takes 110 days & so 4 Months is not that long in jail.
    If the evidence is so weak then why have police charged him ?
    The Judge actually does not look at any evidence & it's only a pleading case before granting or not granting bail.

    I started to read this, but really don't want to read this sh1t on a shopping forum..

    Banned

    WheresMeNuts

    You can only go on by what you read.A court case in Scotland takes 110 … You can only go on by what you read.A court case in Scotland takes 110 days & so 4 Months is not that long in jail.If the evidence is so weak then why have police charged him ?The Judge actually does not look at any evidence & it's only a pleading case before granting or not granting bail.


    so you're just making wild assumptions and have no idea if its the judge or anyone else to blame? Yet you seem to think the judge should be sacked?

    Original Poster

    davey369

    so you're just making wild assumptions and have no idea if its the judge … so you're just making wild assumptions and have no idea if its the judge or anyone else to blame? Yet you seem to think the judge should be sacked?

    So tell me/us what you think ?
    After all you must have an opinion ?

    Phil I get your point, however your example of consequence could have been better.

    In general I know you mean no harm, at the same time you can back down a little to help reinforce your point. For instance, heavens forbid, he reoffends while out on bail. The Judges position should be in jeopardy. Also the resulting offenders sentence should be doubled where found guilty.

    Banned

    WheresMeNuts

    So tell me/us what you think ?After all you must have an opinion ?


    I already have. I would be surprised if the judge hasn't acted in accordance with the law. From the very limited information in the news story it would seem as if he has followed the law.Without having any details whatsoever about the bail aplication no one can say if bail is right or wrong, nor if anyone has acted improperly.

    How about you stop posting things as fact when in fact you are just guessing, for example not everyone has a right to bail, or that a court case in scotland takes 110 days, a very quick google shows that to be wrong
    Edited by: "davey369" 4th Dec 2014

    Original Poster

    davey369

    I already have. I would be surprised if the judge hasn't acted in … I already have. I would be surprised if the judge hasn't acted in accordance with the law. From the very limited information in the news story it would seem as if he has followed the law.Without having any details whatsoever about the bail aplication no one can say if bail is right or wrong, nor if anyone has acted improperly. How about you stop posting things as fact when in fact you are just guessing, for example not everyone has a right to bail, or that a court case in scotland takes 110 days, a very quick google shows that to be wrong

    Of course everyone has a right to bail (Sarcasm)............ but it's common sense that this guy should not have been given bail.
    110 days is correct if your imprisoned & so not sure what your trying to say.AKA fully committal & then they have the high court case.If granted bail they can take longer than 110 days from what I remember.
    I love your PC views,but don't you think the Police felt they had a good case to charge him & if yes,then why give him bail for such a serious charge.....In fact 2 charges.
    .

    Banned

    WheresMeNuts

    Of course everyone has a right to bail (Sarcasm)............ but it's … Of course everyone has a right to bail (Sarcasm)............ but it's common sense that this guy should not have been given bail.110 days is correct if your imprisoned & so not sure what your trying to say.AKA fully committal & then they have the high court case.If granted bail they can take longer than 110 days from what I remember.I love your PC views,but don't you think the Police felt they had a good case to charge him & if yes,then why give him bail for such a serious charge.....In fact 2 charges..



    Maybe Stuart Young should sack the Judge and put himself in remand.

    Original Poster

    maxim24

    So again I'll ask you. Would you be happy for him to be next door to you … So again I'll ask you. Would you be happy for him to be next door to you just now on bail ? After all he's still innocent in your eyes !!Maybe Stuart Young should sack the Judge and put himself in remand.

    Oneday77

    Phil I get your point, however your example of consequence could have … Phil I get your point, however your example of consequence could have been better.In general I know you mean no harm, at the same time you can back down a little to help reinforce your point. For instance, heavens forbid, he reoffends while out on bail. The Judges position should be in jeopardy. Also the resulting offenders sentence should be doubled where found guilty.



    Thanks for understanding - pity others fail

    Of course I would hate anything to happen to anyone but I use the point to express my disgust at the failure of these "people in power/responsibility" for putting "our" children at greater risk. Why should he be free (under bail conditions)? Why is he not locked up pending his court appearance? Why are we too soft on those that commit crimes?

    They kick up a fuss and make judgement on social services/city council failures but when it's their own failure they either sweep it under the carpet or get a golden handshake/early retirement package.

    Do you think more would be done if those "in power/responsibility" were the continued target of phone snatching, of burglary, of bike theft or any other everyday offence?

    Banned

    WheresMeNuts

    So again I'll ask you. Would you be happy for him to be next door to you … So again I'll ask you. Would you be happy for him to be next door to you just now on bail ? After all he's still innocent in your eyes !!



    I wouldnt be happy If he lived next door, as this would mean that ive somehow moved from a detached to a terraced house

    Original Poster

    maxim24

    I wouldnt be happy If he lived next door, as this would mean that ive … I wouldnt be happy If he lived next door, as this would mean that ive somehow moved from a detached to a terraced house

    Detached houses also have nextdoor neighbours & so I'll take it your in agreement with me on this now
    It's just not worth the risk & that was my main point & the judge should know this better than any of us.
    Post a comment
    Avatar
    @
      Text
      Top Discussions
      1. Biscuit addiction1435
      2. Nightmare with BT over Broadband89
      3. Any solicitors? Leasehold covenant Query "business use"22
      4. Working conditions, workers rights. Standing at work causing pain. Is this …1327

      See more discussions