Former Russian officer sentenced for part in Kaspersky kidnapping

Re: Hmmm.

There are churches and churches.

Signing rude words in that particular church is no different than slapping a grass turf mohican on top of Churchill's head as in 2000 and painting blood dripping out of his mouth. Actually, let's correct that it is a bit different due to the time passed). Due to all the religious and dynasty upheavals through the ages Britain does not have an equivalent landmark to St Basil. Canterbury cathedral comes close, but not equivalent so the best comparison would have been screaming obscenities off the altar of the Rheims cathedral as seen by a Frenchman or doing that in the Saint Paul basilica in Rome as seen by an Italian. Or defacing the Washington monument, Arlington or Mt Rushmore as seen by an American.

Any court in any country tends to treat such stunts at significant grade listed historical landmarks (especially ones associated with "national psyche") with little or no leniency. You get the maximum term you can get.

Now the fact that Russia soviet era hooliganism law maximum penalties are a bit insane is a slightly different matter. They were designed to be applied to political cases where the political could not be proven (or for sake of expediency). This is however a different matter from the court applying the law as expected in this particular case (that is the court's job).

By the way, it is quite entertaining how one sided all of the reporting in western media was on that. BBC mentioned the fact that they sang in a listed building only once and in passing and did not give any background on that.

Re: Hmmm.

The 2.5 years does seem silly - a fine or community service would seem more appropriate.

4.5 years for the kidnapping might make sense in a way, though: remember, you need to leave plenty of headroom for harsher sentences. For example, if the kid had actually died in the process? Whoever pulled the trigger should get 20+ years. Accomplices should then get less - 10-15? Less if the kid had been harmed but not killed - maybe 7-9? Now you knock another chunk off because, IIRC, the kid was physically OK and for the accused pleading guilty, you end up in that ballpark.

That's the dilemma with sentencing. Give rapists life in prison for the rape, if you don't have the death penalty then why would a rapist refrain from murdering the victim afterwards? Same sentence either way, but less chance of getting caught without a live victim to identify him. Likewise, you need to reduce the sentence for guilty pleas, or they have nothing to lose by spinning the case out as long as possible. (I'm in favour of stiffer sentences in general, but you need to be careful how and where you apply them.)