Murdering teen scum found guilty.

#2
SCUM and they appear to be a growing breed, alcohol and drug use is NO excuse for what these little SH1T'S have done.

But like what was said, I blame the PARENTS!

When wil the courts pass REAL sentances?
When will prison be HARD Labour and NO remission?
When will LIFE mean LIFE?
 
#3
I kept a close eye on this one, as I have had dealings with this little crew.
They had no respect for anything and no fear of any consequences.
 
#4
theiftaker said:
I kept a close eye on this one, as I have had dealings with this little crew.
They had no respect for anything and no fear of any consequences.
It's true there is a distinct lack of personal responsibility in society today but boy are they about to get a wake up call.
 
#5
Scum. No remorse on their faces. The little shites probably thought they'd get away with it. Lock them up for a 50 years, and release them when there's no chance of getting their lives on track, with no money, no houses, no sexual fulfilment (apart from Man Eater Marvin and is mammoth mambo manhood) and no prospects. And then refuse them state assistance. We need to get a grip on this type of lowlife.
 
#6
They need to be made examples of. Sentences of thirty years each minimum is the only way that justice will be seen to be done. They should not be given the chance to live their lives, they should see their parents grow old and die from their cells and should never have children themselves. I am generally opposed to capital punishment, but these three should hang - they will never be productive members of society.

The justice system, from ministers downwards, is in tatters. These animals should have been banged up long ago, and certainly should never have been out on bail. Violent offenders should be treated like sex offenders; if not in jail then they should be registered, tagged and monitored with behavioural restrictions imposed (ie not owning a car, not drinking alcohol).
 
#7
hong_kong_fuey said:
Scum. No remorse on their faces. The little shites probably thought they'd get away with it. Lock them up for a 50 years, and release them when there's no chance of getting their lives on track, with no money, no houses, no sexual fulfilment (apart from Man Eater Marvin and is mammoth mambo manhood) and no prospects. And then refuse them state assistance. We need to get a grip on this type of lowlife.
In fairness it looks like a the fear of a twenty year reck is just beginning to bed quite nicely in the mind of the geezer on the right.

Trotsky
 
#8
Well at least the best part of what should have been their lives is never now going to happen. Except for maybe the 16 year old, aren't there different rules for them?
 
#9
Unfortunately, i think the max sentence is 15 years.
There was a discussion on radio 4 yesterday about it all. Some rozzer (!) was saying what's the point in them getting anymore than that. why ruin two lives... (obviously forgetting about the family/friends of their victim, whose lives are also ruined.)
 
#11
Lady_H said:
Unfortunately, i think the max sentence is 15 years.
There was a discussion on radio 4 yesterday about it all. Some rozzer (!) was saying what's the point in them getting anymore than that. why ruin two lives... (obviously forgetting about the family/friends of their victim, whose lives are also ruined.)
Max sentence for murder is life but aren't the min to serve what he's talking about? I thought life usually meant 30 years which is fair in my opinion.
 
#12
I meant the maximum sentence handed out in this case- sorry to confuse.
One's got 15 yrs, one's got 12, the other not sure about.
 
#13
So they will all be out in 2 year then.... Anyone remember the story of the little bastards who tied that baby down the the train tracks then smashed its head in, they got out 6 years later after doing "life" and new identies, benefits the whole works, might be worth going out and slotting a few of these cnuts
 
#14
Can anyone else see Vigilante groups as the next step to people protecting themselves against such scum in the future? but if it did occur watch 'plod' go after groups with more vigour than the scum on the streets.
 
#15
Why not give a sentence proportionate to the age of the victim, be it murder or sexual abuse.

Kill a one year old spend 99 years in prison. Kill and sexually abuse a one year old and receive 198 years. Do you see where I am going?

Make it a minimum of 30 years, in this case, so kill a 70 year old you get 30, but take into account that you must have assaulted him beforehand then it makes 60!

Easy. Then make to prisons hard labour, then we're getting somewhere! Plan is, send them away to die, to suffer and to die, old and alone.
 
#16
Hat20 said:
Can anyone else see Vigilante groups as the next step to people protecting themselves against such scum in the future? but if it did occur watch 'plod' go after groups with more vigour than the scum on the streets.
I think the police are getting tired of this Nu Labour, Student Union, Marxist, happy clappy bollox. Especially considering that the government has today awarded police support staff, including community support officers, a 2.5% pay rise, in contrast to the 1.9% (in real terms) awarded to frontline police officers.

Some questions come to my mind when I think of this government. Do they want the UK to fail economically and socially; and, are they trying to create a total breakdown in law and order -- do they want insurrection and, if so, why?
 
#17
Definatly Vigilante groups, ARRSE group? :p , GLB - good idea but wouldnt physchotic people just go round knocking off all the old codgers
 
#18
Lady_H said:
Unfortunately, i think the max sentence is 15 years.
There was a discussion on radio 4 yesterday about it all. Some rozzer (!) was saying what's the point in them getting anymore than that. why ruin two lives... (obviously forgetting about the family/friends of their victim, whose lives are also ruined.)
He finished by saying that in all probability they would end up serving 10 years FFS IM OUTRAGED.
 
#19
hong_kong_fuey said:
Scum. No remorse on their faces. The little shites probably thought they'd get away with it. Lock them up for a 50 years, and release them when there's no chance of getting their lives on track, with no money, no houses, no sexual fulfilment (apart from Man Eater Marvin and is mammoth mambo manhood) and no prospects. And then refuse them state assistance. We need to get a grip on this type of lowlife.
Unfortunately if you released people without any way of leading a normal life they will only have one option in life and that is to continue in a criminal manner. It would be great to say that if they did they could be arrested and jailed but in reality even if they were it would have cost another person being robbed or worse, and that is assuming they were to be caught.

I am not a liberal do gooder and I feel that prison should be hard and unpleasant. But I also feel there should be a rehabilitative stage to a decent sentence. That way on release (on time for behaving rather than time off, delayed for misbehaving) a rehabilitated prisoner has the opportunity to lead a normal life having paid their debt to society. Of course there will be those who reoffend and in those circumstances repeat offences should receive harsher sentences and a '3 strikes rule' operated as those individuals will have clearly shown they cannot be rehabilitated and will spend the rest of their life in jail.
 
#20
Horridlittleman said:
hong_kong_fuey said:
Scum. No remorse on their faces. The little shites probably thought they'd get away with it. Lock them up for a 50 years, and release them when there's no chance of getting their lives on track, with no money, no houses, no sexual fulfilment (apart from Man Eater Marvin and is mammoth mambo manhood) and no prospects. And then refuse them state assistance. We need to get a grip on this type of lowlife.
Unfortunately if you released people without any way of leading a normal life they will only have one option in life and that is to continue in a criminal manner. It would be great to say that if they did they could be arrested and jailed but in reality even if they were it would have cost another person being robbed or worse, and that is assuming they were to be caught.

I am not a liberal do gooder and I feel that prison should be hard and unpleasant. But I also feel there should be a rehabilitative stage to a decent sentence. That way on release (on time for behaving rather than time off, delayed for misbehaving) a rehabilitated prisoner has the opportunity to lead a normal life having paid their debt to society. Of course there will be those who reoffend and in those circumstances repeat offences should receive harsher sentences and a '3 strikes rule' operated as those individuals will have clearly shown they cannot be rehabilitated and will spend the rest of their life in jail.
Whilst I agree that prison should be tough -- very tough -- there should be a coherent education/training programme that is mandatory in order to facilitate rehabilitation. However, some people don't deserve rehabilitation, they don't deserve a second chance. As in the case of these three murderers.

Make the sentences long and hard enough, and they won't have the strength to be menaces to society upon release. Make them live in hostels on their release, on license. Any further crimes, revoke their licenses and shift them back with Psycho Paddy in his PIRA fantasy world. It's not that difficult. We just need the will.
 

Similar threads


Latest Threads

Top