Daniel and Samuel Sledden have again shown how the combination of a demonstrably low intellect and access to social media can be a terrible combination. The two drug dealing brothers were pulled back into court in England by Judge Beverley Lunt after they posted abusive remarks — mocking her for giving them only probation. That directly contradicted the expressions of remorse that the brothers had just made as the basis for suspended sentences.
The brothers admitted being involved in the supply of cannabis between May and September 2014.
Just forty minutes after leaving Burnley Crown Court, Daniel, 27, posted online: “Cannot believe my luck 2 year suspended sentence (sic) beats the 3 year jail yes pal!” He then added “Beverly [sic] Lunt go suck my cock”.
Showing that intelligence levels really are set genetically, his brother, Samuel, 22, then wrote: “What a day it’s been Burnley crown court! Up ur **** aha nice 2 year suspended…”
What is particularly bizarre is that they were heaping insults on a judge who cut them a huge amount of slack in handing down suspended sentences. The postings did not sit well with Lunt who called the men back to court and stated “The question I have to ask myself is this: if I had not known their real feelings at being in court would I have accepted their remorse and contrition, and suspended the sentence.And the answer is of course not.” So now the two brothers will spend two years in jail thinking about the perils of social media.
25 thoughts on “Two Brothers Heaped Insults On Judge After She Gives Them Suspended Sentences . . . Judge Calls Them Back and Sends Them To Jail For Two Years”
More pot pushers jailed, tax payers get jabbed for their upkeep….@Squeeky Fromm at LEAST the last THREE Presidents have smoked pot, so ya you have a point about how much damage pot MAY have done….Hhahahhahaha
Time to stop the nutty war on drugs….
Scalia has passed the Pearly Gates, is in heaven, and is yakking with all sorts of people up on Cloud 9. It is my belief that Google will devise a way to obtain their comments.
Scalia moved the country further down the road to an entrenched oligarchy. He did so by interpreting the Constitution his way. A more democratic and truer to the intentions of the Constitution judge would have pointed the country down the road to eliminating money as the decision making element. The Constitution is what ever who is in power deems it to mean. That cannot be that hard to understand with the NRA, oligarchs, etc. out there running things, against the wishes of the people.
What the heck “victimless” crime are you talking about??? Is the water mess in Flint Michigan victimless??? Drugs are a lot more dangerous than that. Here is a link to drug overdose deaths, legal and illegal drugs:
Plus, what are pot smokers and other drug addicts doing to the countries where they grow the stuff??? We get irate at kiddie porn users because their money is supporting the whole sorry business. What do drug user’s money help finance???
The alcohol and tobacco argument is just distraction. The fact that they also have victims, doesn’t make pot victimless. IMHO, scratch a “Pot Should Be Legal” person, and you find a selfish dope fiend who likes to smoke pot, and doesn’t care how it affects other people.
In a more enlightened world, no one would even be arrested for a victimless crime.
Rx companies can legally promote drugs which often have deadly consequences when taken as directed, and doctors get rich from the fees they charge to send you to the dealers at CVS to get your fix.
Alcohol and tobacco, unlike most illegal substances, are responsible for deaths and other problems every – to thousands of innocent people – while the NPR crowd crowd here applauds locking up people for smoking a flower. Ain’t that peculiar.
Comments are closed.