Rotherham child rapist has sentence doubled Up from 6 years to 12. Might do 4 now.

Rotherham child rapist has sentence doubled Up from 6 years to 12. Might do 4 now.

Because you say it doesn't make it fact.

No it doesn't. But the fact that it is actually a fact makes it a fact.

^ this

Anything to support this being a fact in this case?

From the report: "The woman, whose identity is protected by law, said: "I couldn't believe they'd closed my case. I felt let down again and totally trapped."

Now can you suggest, given the fact that it was her father that was convicted, could possibly have her identity protected by law, if her birth father's identity is published? His ethnicity and/or religion are immaterial to any public interest, save for the purposes of demonising a religion/ethnic group or satisfying some form of weird voyeurism.

I can't tell if you are being deliberately obtuse or are just plain thick

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:Rotherham child rapist has sentence doubled Up from 6 years to 12. Might do 4 now. Why would he only do four years?

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:Rotherham child rapist has sentence doubled Up from 6 years to 12. Might do 4 now. Why would he only do four years?

Just because it says that and the law says that doesn't make it a fact.

LeagueDweeb wrote:Anything to support this being a fact in this case? Section 1 of this act that is still in force Good enough for you, troll?

LeagueDweeb wrote:Anything to support this being a fact in this case? Section 1 of this act that is still in force Good enough for you, troll?

What happened to challenging facts? He's letting the side down.