“Muh circumstances”

Two words I am sick of hearing any time some scum bag is convicted of scumbaggery: ‘Mitigating circumstances’.  Not that there shouldn’t be a facility for such a concept – there needs to be.  You can’t just have a flat out charge of murder with rigid sentences.  Why not?  Because there is a world of difference between the actions of say Dr. Harold Shipman (serial killer) and the man who kills an intruder in his home.  The latter would almost certainly have a sound case to cite mitigating circumstances.  The former?  Not so much.  It’s the carte blanche use of “mitigating circumstances” that I object to rather than the idea itself.  It is deployed so liberally now that literally everyone would have a mitigating circumstance if they thought about it hard enough.  The liberal use of this perverts the course of justice and does not enhance it.

Here is an example from the RSPCA website:

A drunken cat-sitter stabbed a tabby cat called Toby nine times with a kitchen knife while he was supposed to have been looking after him for his mother.  The man phoned police to say he’d stabbed the cat, he needed a vet and that he’d drunk 15 pints when the cat had attacked him.  The police called us for assistance when they were unable to catch the cat.

The police found the man had blood stains on his top and still had blood on his hands and wrists which were scratched.  A five inch steak knife was found in the sink which was covered with blood which the man said he had used when he attacked the cat.  RSPCA Inspector Mick Darling took Toby to a vet where he was given pain relief.  He was then sedated and once he was asleep his fur was clipped revealing multiple wounds on both his left and right side.  Several further stab wounds were found leading the vet to believe Toby had been held down while he was subjected to a sustained and vicious attack.  Police took the cat into possession and he was signed over into our care.  Toby was put up for rehoming once he’d fully recovered.

The man said he’d been carving chicken at the time when Toby approached him and scratched him on his hands.  In interview he said, “I saw red and that were it!”.  The 43-year-old unemployed man pleaded guilty to causing unnecessary suffering to Toby.  Mitigation was heard claiming the cat has temper problems and as the man pushed him away Toby attacked him before he lashed out with the five-inch knife.  It was added that the defendant had drink problems and was horrified by what he’d done and was full of remorse.

The bench concluded that the matter was so serious that only custody would be warranted.  When the mother of the man learnt of the costs we’d incurred in treating Toby she gave us a donation of £1,000.


The only two bright spots here are that the cat lived and the mother demonstrated a level of decency by forking out a grand.  This makes her an angel compared to the svelte super model – Hannah Le Coco De Frankish Le Ferrari-White.  Her reaction was to whore herself out on dating sites while getting someone with a sexual assault conviction to send poor excuses and lies on behalf of her mutant offspring.

With that being said the mother surely must have known that her son was a drunken loser with a mental temper.  Pretty poor judgment by her from the start.  However, he is the adult and him having a bad temper shouldn’t be a valid mitigating circumstance.  He should have dealt with it long before it got to this.  And if he can drink FIFTEEN pints and do this with his temper then what person would want to bump into this dickhead unprepared?  He chose to drink fifteen pints.  He is 43 not a 3-year-old let loose in a sweet shop.  Why is it a valid mitigating circumstance to fail to have any self control?  Those two little Frankish maggots cited mitigating circumstances I recall.  I’d love to know what those were.  My guesses would be:

1) Muh drugs
2) Muh relationship with father
3) Muh bullied at school

Any one (or all three) of which are just an utter nonsense.  Rest assured though, if I was to so much touch a hair on the head of either then I’d probably get sentenced to 4000 years.

Mitigating circumstances should not be code for getting a free pass based on being a drunken or drug-addled waste of space.  It should only be reserved for something like what I mentioned at the start – if someone broke into your home, you confronted them and they die.



One thought on ““Muh circumstances”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s