Woman guilty of manslaughter after stabbing paedophile neighbour to death

[BabyBoyLove]

A man who admitted killing a convicted sex offender in a flat fire in Worcester has been jailed for 10 years.

This describes the problem... He killed a man. The victims last conviction was 14 years prior, and he has seemingly lived there for 12 years without any (sex related) offenses. The victim posed no risk. Another clear example of white washing that it was a brutal vigilante murder.

[Gaki]

Should this terrible event be the starting call of a pedophile revolution of liberation and equality?  How about we have a design competition for a pedophile "rainbow flag" that we can proudly display in the streets?

Let us stay on topic...  I know you are a new member, JackJones.  there are many other topics that address what you are going on about specifically.

This topic is about Crime and Punishment and specifically about this woman's sentence for killing a convicted pedophile and one who was on trial again for the same or similar crimes.  This is not the place to discuss freeing pedophiles, revolution or flags.

As for Neighbor's post, I notice the distinction of first the crime being perpetrated by a male, he is young and he unmistakably made an effort - lighting a bin on fire and wheeling it up to the front door so the man could not get out.  I know that there is the 'notion' that premeditated makes it murder, and I still feel that taking a knife to another's house makes it somewhat premeditated, the notion of her language in the statements to the police making it premeditated, but there is the nugget of doubt that she could have brought the knife for protection...  although how she could fear a 70 year old man, I am not sure, but the benefit of the doubt must prevail, sadly.

o.0

[StevenX]

A man who admitted killing a convicted sex offender in a flat fire in Worcester has been jailed for 10 years.

This describes the problem... He killed a man. The victims last conviction was 14 years prior, and he has seemingly lived there for 12 years without any (sex related) offenses. The victim posed no risk. Another clear example of white washing that it was a brutal vigilante murder.

I wouldn't say it's white washing if the fact that the victim being a sex offender was the primary motive for the crime. Fair enough if Martin didn't like Heath for some other unrelated reason, but this wasn't the case. Sure we could simplify it to "man kills man", but I don't condemn the article for including 'convicted sex offender' in this particular instance.

Back to the original case though, which to me seems little more than "oh, she killed someone... but he was a pedo... pedos are bad... I'll go easy on her". I'd put good money on the judge being a conservative.

[stalker]

Come on, who is she for him? He shouldn't even talk to her.

And she should rot in prison.

[on the rocks]

The next step is everyone being okay with the vigilante murder of anyone simply accused of sex crimes against a child, without any 'priors'.

"Courts and due process are for pussies and faggots!  Let's round up a posse!!!"  -some future mob

[ministraw]

After looking at all of the information, this does sound like murder.. I wonder who was on the jury. I'd like to hear the trial.

[Neighbor]

Even the original 7 year sentence was a travesty, but to have it reduced to 3-1/2, of which she will likely only serve 11 months more than she has already? Disgusting.

I keep thinking of "Helen", who was Yardbird's 2IC in the group... he was sentenced to 25 years for his activities in the group, primarily sharing images. If anything, I think the sentences should have been reversed -- Helen should have got the 3-1/2 years, and Sands should have got the 25-year sentence.

Neighbor

Sarah Sands attacked 77-year-old neighbour Michael Pleasted within weeks of hearing he had sexually abused three children

[Photo]
Sarah Sands, whose sentence was reduced from seven years. Photograph: Metropolitan police/PA

Press Association
Tuesday 29 September 2015 16.14 BST
Last modified on Wednesday 30 September 2015 00.01 BST
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/sep/29/mother-five-sarah-sands-jailed-for-stabbing-to-death-convicted-paedophile (tor safe, ensure scripts disabled)

A woman has been jailed for three-and-a-half years for manslaughter, after stabbing a convicted paedophile to death.

Sarah Sands, 32, wept as she was sentenced at the Old Bailey on Tuesday. Sands was cleared of murdering her neighbour, 77-year-old Michael Pleasted, but found guilty of manslaughter by reason of loss of control, in July.

Woman cleared of murder after stabbing convicted paedophile to death

On the evening of 28 November last year, she armed herself with a knife and stabbed Pleasted eight times at his flat in Canning Town, east London.

Sands, a mother of five, acted within weeks of hearing that Pleasted had sexually abused three children.

Judge Nicholas Cooke QC said it was a "truly exceptional case" as he reduced her sentence from seven years, taking into consideration her position as a single mother.

Sands has already been in custody for the past 10 months and could be released on parole and reunited with her family in as little as 11 months' time.

The judge stressed that Sands's case was unique because she had lost control rather than taken the law into her own hands and engaged in "vigilante conduct". He said: "There must never be the slightest encouragement for mob rule."

Explaining his decision to lower the jail term, the judge went on: "This was a case in which the defendant promptly gave herself up to the police in a highly stressed state, never disputed responsibility for the killing as a matter of fact, did not take the opportunity to get rid of evidence and demonstrated remorse."

After the "determined and sustained attack", Pleasted crawled from his living room and collapsed in the hallway, where he bled to death.

Within hours, Sands handed herself in to police, telling an officer: "Who houses a fucking paedophile on an estate, like, seriously? He was, like, asking for trouble."

She explained she had thought Pleasted was just a nice old man, adding: "He's fucking harmless now, ain't he?"

At the time, Pleasted was on bail awaiting trial at Snaresbrook crown court on two charges of sexual assault on two children under 13. Police were investigating a further allegation that he had abused a third boy.

The Old Bailey heard that Pleasted had a string of convictions for sexually assaulting boys between 1970 and 1991. Pleasted, who also went by the name of Robin Moult, had 24 previous convictions for sexual offences before he met the children he was accused of molesting last year.

He served sentences of between nine months and six years for sex crimes that included indecent assault on a male over 16, indecent assault on a male under 16, indecent assault on a male under 14 and buggery.

But before the fresh allegations emerged, Pleasted had become a well-known community figure running a bric-a-brac stall from a local shop, the court heard.

Sands had befriended him and used to bring home-cooked meals to his flat.

During the trial earlier this year, Sands sobbed in the witness box as she insisted she had not meant to hurt Pleasted when she went to his flat on the night of the killing after drinking a bottle of brandy.

She told jurors she had gone there to plead with him to admit his crimes and spare his young accusers from having to go to court. But when Pleasted answered the door, he ignored her request and just "smirked" as he told her the boys were all liars who had ruined his life.

Sands said: "I was frightened. It was not how it was meant to go. He was meant to listen to me."

The jury of 10 women and two men deliberated for three days before clearing her of murder and convicting her of manslaughter..

[Neighbor]

The article I just posted in The Guardian was more or less matter of fact. In contrast, the Daily Mail's coverage was far more sensational, and attempted to paint the killer in a more positive light:

Neighbor

Judge's sympathy for 'parent under enormous pressure' as he jails mother-of-five who stabbed her paedophile neighbour to death for just three-and-a-half years

*    Sarah Sands, 32, killed neighbour Michael Pleasted, 77, at his London flat
*    She lived near Pleasted, was friends with him and defended him against 'paedo claims'
*    But she turned on pensioner after he was charged with child abuse
*    Sands was cleared of murder but convicted of manslaughter by reason of loss of control
*    Judge says case was 'truly exceptional' and took her position as a single mother into account when reducing her sentence

By Lucy Crossley for MailOnline
Published: 10:01 EST, 29 September 2015 | Updated: 18:23 EST, 29 September 2015

[Picture of convicted killer Sarah Sands]
Mother Sarah Sands (pictured) stabbed a convicted paedophile to death as she confronted him over child abuse allegations

A single mother-of-five 'under enormous pressure' who stabbed a convicted paedophile to death as she confronted him over child abuse allegations was jailed for three-and-a-half years today.

Sarah Sands, 32, had lived on the same estate in Canning Town, east London as 77-year-old Michael Pleasted, cooked him meals and defended him against neighbours who called him a 'paedo' - not knowing that he had 24 previous convictions for sex offences.

When fresh allegations were made against Pleasted, Sands was furious that Pleasted - who was released on bail - was allowed to return to an estate where children lived.

Ten days after Pleasted appeared in court accused of child abuse, Sands took a knife to his flat and stabbed him in a 'frenzied attack'.

The mother-of-five was cleared by a jury at the Old Bailey of murder, but convicted of manslaughter by reason of loss of control.

Sentencing her, Judge Nicholas Cook QC today said the defence would not be available to anyone who deliberately took the law into their own hands or engaged in vigilantism.

'You were a parent placed under enormous pressure who lost control,' he told Sands as she wept in the dock.

Judge Cook said it was a 'truly exceptional case' as he reduced her sentence from seven years to three-and-a-half, taking into consideration her position as a single mother.

Sands could be released next year after already serving 10 months in Holloway prison - the equivalent of a 20-month sentence.

Judge Cook said that as a result of their mother being in custody, her children were living 'in conditions reminiscent of the novels of Charles Dickens or Elizabeth Gaskell.'

[Photo of stabbing victim Michael Pleasted]
Sands had lived on the same estate as 77-year-old Michael Pleasted (pictured) and cooked him meals and defended him against neighbours who called him a 'paedo'

He said: 'Taking these matters into consideration but acknowledging there must be a limit on mercy when a life has been taken, I reduce the sentence upon you to one of three and a half years imprisonment.'

But the judge warned that the sentence reflected her manslaughter conviction and was not a green-light for copy-cat killings. 

'I have to sentence you for an offence of manslaughter; the unlawful taking of another's life, but not murder,' he said.

'This is not a case in which anyone suggests you represent any continuing danger, save possibly to yourself.'

[Photo of killer entering lift after killing, holding bloodstained kitchen knife in her left hand]
Sarah Sands, 32, killed her 77-year-old neighbour Michael Pleasted at his flat in Canning Town, east London, ten days after he appeared in court for sexually assaulting young boys. She is pictured holding a knife after leaving the flat where she subjected him to a 'frenzied' attack

The judge stressed that Sands's case was 'unique' because she had lost control rather than taken the law into her own hands and acted as a vigilante.

He added: 'It is necessary for me to stress that such a verdict would not be available to a defendant who is guilty of a considered act of taking the law into her or his own hands or who is involved in vigilante type conduct.

'Such a defendant must and would face the full force of the law of murder.

'That however is not your case. There must never be the slightest encouragement for mob rule.'

Explaining his decision to lower the jail term, the judge went on: 'This was a case in which the defendant promptly gave herself up to the police in a highly stressed state, never disputed responsibility for the killing as a matter of fact, did not take the opportunity to get rid of evidence and demonstrated remorse.'

The judge said Pleasted was 'vulnerable' and had been subject to a 'frenzied' attack.

[Artists' rendition of weeping killer in the dock]
The judge stressed that Sands's case was 'unique' because the single mother (pictured in a court sketch) had lost control rather than taken the law into her own hands and acted as a vigilante

[Photo of killer exiting lift on her way to victim's apartment]
Wearing a hooded jumper, Sands was caught on CCTV going to Mr Pleasted's third floor flat (pictured)

During the trial it emerged that Pleasted, who also went by the name of Robin Moult, had 24 previous convictions for sexual offences between 1970 and 1991.

He served sentences of between nine months and six years for indecent assault on boys and buggery.

At the time of his death, Pleasted was on bail awaiting trial at Snaresbrook Crown Court on two charges of sexual assault on two children aged under 13. Police were investigating a further allegation he had abused a third boy.

He was allowed to return to his home on the same estate where the attacks were said to have occurred, on the condition that he did not have any unsupervised contact with children.

On the evening of November 28 last year, Sands armed herself with a knife and went to his flat in to confront him about the allegations.

Sands' barrister, Sally O'Neill QC, described the bail decision as 'incomprehensible' and said: 'The consequences of what followed from that decision is why we are in court today.'

'I do not seek to minimise the fact a man lost his life or seek to justify it. Neither does Sarah Sands.

'She knew immediately she had done something very wrong and has never tried to say otherwise.

[Photo of killer entering lift with bloodstained knife in her left hand after killing]
Twenty minutes later she left the building carrying a bloodstained knife in her left hand

But it is our submission that this tragic outcome was probably avoidable if it was dealt with in a different and we say more appropriate way.'

Pleasted, known as Mick, was a well known figure in the Silvertown area and ran a bric-a-brac stall at the back of a Mace convenience store.

Sands had been friends with Pleasted and even brought him food. She originally thought he was a 'positive male role model' for local children and defended him when he was accused of being a 'paedo'.

However, she later took the law into her own hands after he was allowed to remain on the estate in Silvertown, east London, while awaiting trial following the fresh allegations.

Sands had downed two bottles of wine and a whisky miniature before arming herself with a 12-inch kitchen knife to confront her neighbour.

At 8.30pm she was caught on CCTV going to Mr Pleasted's third floor flat, and 20 minutes later she left the building carrying a bloodstained knife in her left hand.

After the 'determined and sustained attack', the victim crawled from his living room and collapsed in his hallway where he bled to death.

Sands returned to her flat and changed out of her bloodstained clothes, having told a neighbour: 'Pretend you never saw me.'

She then took a taxi to see her stepson Paul Penn and tearfully confessed to stabbing Mr Pleasted.

Within hours, Sands handed herself into police, telling an officer: 'Who houses a f****** paedophile on an estate, like, seriously? He was, like, asking for trouble.'

When questioned Sands asked 'Is he dead?' before adding: 'He can't hurt kids now.'

Sands sobbed in the witness box as she told jurors she had gone to plead with Pleasted to admit his crimes and spare his young accusers from having to go to court. She said she had taken the knife for protection.

Sidebar

HOW HE HID FOR 16 YEARS

For 16 years Michael Pleasted lived in a council flat overlooking a children's playground and a primary school.

He was also able to get close to children by volunteering at a community centre.

But parents had no idea he was a paedophile with 24 previous convictions for child sex offences from 1971 and 1990.

His local council were also unaware of his past because he had changed his named from Robin Moult. He was under no obligation to tell Newham Council about his convictions or his change of name.

And, unlike now, neither the police nor probation service had a duty to share information about him. He was not on the sex offenders register because his crimes pre-dated it.

His past only came to light when he was arrested in 2014 over allegations that he sexually assaulted two boys.

[Photo of the street in Silvertown, where the estate was situated]
Pleasted was stabbed in the chest in his flat in this street in Silvertown, east London

But when he answered the door, he ignored her request and just 'smirked' as he told her the boys were all liars who had ruined his life.

Sands said: 'I was frightened. It was not how it was meant to go. He was meant to listen to me.' 

Following the verdict, police said the jury were right to clear Sands of murder.

Speaking outside court, DS Perry Benton said: 'I think it's the right verdict.

'The jury have taken a considerable time to reach the verdict... but eventually reached the right verdict.'

Asked why Pleasted was on bail, he replied: 'The police arrested him and charged him, remanding him in custody to go to court as part of the judicial process and it was the courts' decision to grant him bail.'

Speaking after today's hearing an NSPCC spokesman said: 'It would appear important opportunities to share information about Pleasted were unfortunately missed.

'But we mustn't forget that sex offenders are often devious and will do whatever they can to cover their tracks.

'This makes it even more difficult to monitor those who are not on the Sex Offenders' Register and means it is vital that information is shared in an appropriate way.'

[Gaki]

I find it annoying - that someone convicted of a child-related crime cannot be anywhere near a child...  or child-related paraphenalia... but someone who has murdered... do they consider them basically a 'ticking time bomb' ready to murder at a moment's opportunity?  No, of course not.  It is on a case-by-case basis... some did it out of opportunity or emotion (manslaughter), others are meticulous and calculating and do it over and over again...  despite the fact that it is very wrong (serial killers).  Society seems to be able to differentiate the two.

Why is it that when it comes to serial rapists vs someone who has raped once, even they can see this... but if someone gets convicted for CP, they will rape every child given they can reach out and grab them...

She will be hailed as a bit of an anti-hero, but no one will question why she did it, just that she should have perhaps approached it a different way.  Sad that society has such skewed views... 

Standard disclaimer: This does not justify any behavior, child-related or not... it is purely a thought exercise denoting the difference in attitude of 'criminals who have paid their debt to society' - and unfortunately child sex offenders never fully pay that debt back, it seems.

o.0

[Atlantis]

I find it annoying - that someone convicted of a child-related crime cannot be anywhere near a child...  or child-related paraphenalia... but someone who has murdered... do they consider them basically a 'ticking time bomb' ready to murder at a moment's opportunity?  No, of course not.  It is on a case-by-case basis... some did it out of opportunity or emotion (manslaughter), others are meticulous and calculating and do it over and over again...  despite the fact that it is very wrong (serial killers).  Society seems to be able to differentiate the two.

Why is it that when it comes to serial rapists vs someone who has raped once, even they can see this... but if someone gets convicted for CP, they will rape every child given they can reach out and grab them...

She will be hailed as a bit of an anti-hero, but no one will question why she did it, just that she should have perhaps approached it a different way.  Sad that society has such skewed views... 

Standard disclaimer: This does not justify any behavior, child-related or not... it is purely a thought exercise denoting the difference in attitude of 'criminals who have paid their debt to society' - and unfortunately child sex offenders never fully pay that debt back, it seems.

o.0

I agree that there is a very definite disconnect between viewing pornography and rape, it doesn't make any difference IMO whether it is of adults or children (or grannies, for that matter).

I could be convinced, though, of a connection between crimes done for a thrill, rather than personal gain, and the chances of the perpertrator re-offending.  How many people here have "given up" collecting CP more than once, for example (I know I have).

[PhilL]

She appointed herself judge, jury and executioner. The knife was not for self protection since none was needed as a smirk is not lethal use of force. It was premeditated in that she wanted him gone just in case he might repeat being a predator. Plain and simple case of murder for which a slap on the hand is insufficient punishment for her crime.  Which of the accusers met that fate at his hand? Had any he should have been dispatched to the grave with all haste.

[HowardBL]

Yup she was looking to kill him, I just wanted him to listen to me is hilarious, she had it all planned out and she just wanted an excuse to use a knife on him. Perhaps I will never come out and about that I am a Pedophile. Hell if I ever do go to prison for the children that I have had sex with I hope that someone stabs me to death because there is no way I could handle life outside as a registered child sex offender.

[torzilla]

This angers me to no end, so this person was clearly looking to kill him, that's why she had a weapon. But what I don't understand is how the judge and be so lenient with murder but when come to other charges like CP possession they just give the highest sentence possible at that moment. It's like they see us as less than humans. Sure our point of view regarding what is considered attractive is completely different to what is considered "normal"  but this is a complete injustice.

[BabyBoyLove]

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jan/22/woman-killed-paedophile-london-sentence-doubled

Woman who killed child abuser has sentence more than doubled
Original term of three and a half years handed to Sarah Sands for stabbing Michael Pleasted to death ruled unduly lenient

A woman who stabbed a convicted paedophile to death has had her "unduly lenient" three-and-a-half year prison sentence more than doubled.

Sarah Sands, 33, was found guilty of the manslaughter of her neighbour Michael Pleasted, 77, after learning he had been charged with sexually assaulting young boys. A trial in September heard that Pleasted was stabbed eight times and bled to death, and Sands was found guilty of his death by reason of loss of control.

Judges at the court of appeal in London increased the prison term originally imposed in the case to seven and a half years on Friday, after the case was referred by the attorney general, Jeremy Wright QC, over concerns that the original sentencing had been "unduly lenient".

Sands, a single mother of five from east London, killed Pleasted within weeks of hearing that he had been released on bail ahead of his trial on two charges of sexual assault on children aged under 13. He was also under investigation for a further allegation regarding a third boy.

In November 2014 Sands armed herself with a knife and went to Pleasted's flat in Canning Town, east London, to confront him about the allegations, which is when the "determined and sustained attack" took place.

After handing herself in, Sands told a police officer the victim had touched some children "so I took care of him – I stabbed him". She told the court she had not to intended to hurt Pleasted but he "smirked" when he answered the door and said the boys were liars who had ruined his life.

"I was frightened. It was not how it was meant to go. He was meant to listen to me," she said.

During the trial it emerged that Pleasted, who also went by the name of Robin Moult, had 24 previous convictions for sexual offences between 1970 and 1991.

The presiding judge, Nicholas Cooke QC, said the case was unique as Sands had lost control rather than taken the law into her own hands and engaged in "vigilante conduct". He said: "This was a case in which the defendant promptly gave herself up to the police in a highly stressed state, never disputed responsibility for the killing as a matter of fact, did not take the opportunity to get rid of evidence and demonstrated remorse."

Cooke took into consideration Sand's position as a single mother, as well as her admission of guilt when sentencing.

But three judges at the court of appeal ruled that because Sands had taken a knife to the scene, the fact she inflicted fatal injuries and the jury's finding that she must have intended to cause really serious harm to the victim, the sentence should be increased to seven and a half years.

Sands watched the proceedings via video link from prison. The increased sentence was announced by Lady Justice Macur after the court heard arguments on behalf of the attorney general that three and a half years was "insufficient".

Sitting with Mrs Justice Patterson and Judge Julian Goose QC, Macur added: "It is, of course, with a heavy heart that any court must consider the dashing of expectations. But in order that this offence should be properly reflected by a sentence which takes into account all the relevant facts, and not just those relating to the offender, we come to the conclusion that the attorney general must succeed."

A spokesman for the attorney general's office said: "Our office received a great deal of correspondence in regards to this highly emotive and sensitive case. Following careful review, this case was referred to the court of appeal as it was felt the original sentence was unduly lenient, and the court of appeal increased the sentence to seven and a half years."

[on the rocks]

Since she was a single mother, wouldn't it be super ironic if her own children were put into foster care and molested while she was in prison?
Not that I would ever wish that on any child, but it would be really, really, really ironic.  The irony would be so thick you could cut it with a knife...