News Litigation The Bar Cherie Booth’s “religious man” sentencing did not constitute misconduct By Margaret Taylor 10 June 2010 16:42 17 December 2015 15:53 Sign in or register to continue reading. It's FREE Sign in Email Password Keep me logged in Forgot your password? Not registered? It's FREE! Register now Register with The Lawyer bobby smith 11 June 2010 at 17:08 ‘God’ really does move in mysterious ways. Odd that a religion that feels comfortable shielding child abusers should have any dignity left to pontificate on the morals of others! Reply Link Anon 12 June 2010 at 22:18 Strikes me this woman is as competent a Judge as her husband was a Prime Minister Reply Link Anonymous 13 June 2010 at 17:21 Do they normally not provide a shred of reasoning for their decisions? Reply Link Paul W Kerr 16 June 2010 at 21:54 I hope that if and when someone thumps me I only cop a “mild” fractured jaw Reply Link Discrimination against the secular 18 June 2010 at 11:49 The OJC is totally off-base. Whatever happened to all men are equal before the law? Clearly Ms. Booth’s decision was affected by the fact that the defendant was a religious man. That IS misconduct. If it’s not, it should be. This would suggest that those who claim they hold religious beliefs get a lighter sentence than someone who claimed to be an aetheist. This amounts to outright discrimination (against those secular) and should rightfully be complained about. Spirtual beliefs should not be allowed to be used as a get out of jail free card, nor should they form the basis (or part of the basis) for criminal sentencing. Reply Link Anon 19 June 2010 at 19:16 Rap on the knuckles for Cherie from top judge Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1287840/Rap-knuckles-Cherie-judge.html#ixzz0rKA4oQEu Reply Link Anonymous 21 June 2010 at 19:55 Errm… shouldn’t it be that since the man believed in a religious code that supposedly prohibits unjustifiable violence then that would, if anything, mean that since he admits to knowing that what he did was wrong, harsher treatment was merited? How about a sentence from the man’s own religious system? One that is used in other states that consider his religious beliefs to be the foundation from which appropriate sentences are derived. Like chop off the offending hand. Waddya mean that’s unreasonable? You gotta problem with his religion? You racist or summat? Reply Link Name Email Cancel reply Threaded commenting powered by interconnect/it code.