Poor punishment for Killers?

#2
As it says - 21yrs and 17 yrs respectively doesn't mean they will serve that length of time.

The long drop I don't agree with.

That they serve the full sentence given down by the Judge, I do
 
#3
So they will be out in about 10 years, still young enough to be a danger to society at large.
 
#4
BBC link

A terrible waste of life carried out by two evil people who will no doubt serve too little of their sentences, be released too early and able to reoffend. The only sentence that these two deserve is true life imprisonment. Let's see if the bleeding hearts brigade start trying to blame their crime on a broken family, lack of a male role model in the family and not being given the same opportunities as their victim may have received.
 
#5
The 21 and 17 yr sentences are the minimum to be served as they have life sentences - so they won't be out before they get to this point and could in theory be held forever as they will have to prove that they are no longer a danger to the public

You can argue about the death sentence, but its not my thing I'd rather have em in the nick where they can think about what they have done to wast their lives- or failing that so we can study em and work out how to alter the psychology of others before they reach this point.

Just a thought
 
#6
If by study you mean vivisection, Im all for it!
 
#7
Worth mentioning that the parents of the murdered man have raised a substantial amount of cash to help 'disadvantaged' teenagers find another course in life than these two murderous scum.

While I might not agree with them, the fact that they appear to bear no malice against their son's killers personally and are trying to help others in his name is to be applauded. I would have wanted them strung up by the knackers in their position.
 
#8
Chain gangs should be brought in. Breaking rocks in a quarry. Give them a quota say two ton before they have worked enough to earn a meal. Then prisons could become partially self funding.
 
#10
MrNurse said:
The 21 and 17 yr sentences are the minimum to be served as they have life sentences - so they won't be out before they get to this point and could in theory be held forever as they will have to prove that they are no longer a danger to the public
Afraid not. If the tariff is 21 or 17 years then you can instantly halve that for good behaviour, less time already spent on remand, less the fact they can appeal and promise never, ever to be beastly again.

Should be on the streets again in about seven years.
 
#11
Awol said:
MrNurse said:
The 21 and 17 yr sentences are the minimum to be served as they have life sentences - so they won't be out before they get to this point and could in theory be held forever as they will have to prove that they are no longer a danger to the public
Afraid not. If the tariff is 21 or 17 years then you can instantly halve that for good behaviour, less time already spent on remand, less the fact they can appeal and promise never, ever to be beastly again.

Should be on the streets again in about seven years.
Life sentence tarrifs are not subject to early release. The tarrif simply is the point in their life sentence that they can be considered for release on licence. Of course if they are bad boys in the box then they may have to apply several times to get released on licence. It is the one case where it is the minimum they will serve.

Peter
 
#12
Awol said:
MrNurse said:
The 21 and 17 yr sentences are the minimum to be served as they have life sentences - so they won't be out before they get to this point and could in theory be held forever as they will have to prove that they are no longer a danger to the public
Afraid not. If the tariff is 21 or 17 years then you can instantly halve that for good behaviour, less time already spent on remand, less the fact they can appeal and promise never, ever to be beastly again.

Should be on the streets again in about seven years.
No the sentace was life with a minimum of 21 and 17 years given to each. Still to short by half.
 
#13
Awol said:
MrNurse said:
The 21 and 17 yr sentences are the minimum to be served as they have life sentences - so they won't be out before they get to this point and could in theory be held forever as they will have to prove that they are no longer a danger to the public
Afraid not. If the tariff is 21 or 17 years then you can instantly halve that for good behaviour, less time already spent on remand, less the fact they can appeal and promise never, ever to be beastly again.

Should be on the streets again in about seven years.
Judicial recommendations of sentences cannot be reduced by parole, so Your first point is incorrect. If a judge refuses to allow an appeal then it cannot happen
 
#14
Awol said:
MrNurse said:
The 21 and 17 yr sentences are the minimum to be served as they have life sentences - so they won't be out before they get to this point and could in theory be held forever as they will have to prove that they are no longer a danger to the public
Afraid not. If the tariff is 21 or 17 years then you can instantly halve that for good behaviour, less time already spent on remand, less the fact they can appeal and promise never, ever to be beastly again.

Should be on the streets again in about seven years.
Afraid not old chap. They were sentenced to 21 and 17 years minimum before being considered for parole. For once i feel the law has done something right (although that may be down to pavlovian conditioning, what with the large number of increasingly questionable sentences dished out recently!)
 
#15
To short a sentence for me. I think they should have had their neck's stretched. We are far to soft in this country and it's my tax dollars that will pay for these animals to suffer (I think not) in jail.

We should be testing drugs on these on these scumbags for medical science.

Remember you need to break eggs to make an omlete.
 
#16
How about release them when they've died in custody? We dont need predatory scum like that on the streets.

And whilst theyre inside make em work for their living, chain gangs cleaning off graffiti, weeding motorway verges and picking up litter, working in a prison laundry cleaning sh1tty sheets from hospitals etc.

Scum
 
#17
Total waste of money keeping scum like these locked up , a short length of rope and a long drop . the same rope can be used for both , and others ,.
This does give a deterrent , and most certainly ensures they never ever commit another offence plus it is extremely cheap.
There is also a way of making it profitable ,,, video them screaming as the rope is put round their necks and flog the dvd's
 
#18
I beleive in the sanctity of human life, I honestly do, to such an extent that I have come to the conclusion that the only way to protect this sanctity is to occaisionally step across the line and break it.

Just like we should do with these barbaric morons necks. Kill 'em. Once some of these creatures realise that a "Cushy" little number in HMP is not always going to be on the cards they may think twice about being barbaric little sh1ts.

It would save a lot of money too, about 10ft of good stout rope, and a bit of scaffolding (rented for the day) then just lob the scroats of the top.

Done and dusted.
 
#19
maxi_77 said:
Awol said:
MrNurse said:
The 21 and 17 yr sentences are the minimum to be served as they have life sentences - so they won't be out before they get to this point and could in theory be held forever as they will have to prove that they are no longer a danger to the public
Afraid not. If the tariff is 21 or 17 years then you can instantly halve that for good behaviour, less time already spent on remand, less the fact they can appeal and promise never, ever to be beastly again.

Should be on the streets again in about seven years.
Life sentence tarrifs are not subject to early release. The tarrif simply is the point in their life sentence that they can be considered for release on licence. Of course if they are bad boys in the box then they may have to apply several times to get released on licence. It is the one case where it is the minimum they will serve.

Peter
Is that why Craig Sweeney will be eligible for parole five and a half years into an 18 year "life sentence" for the abduction and rape of a three year old little girl? Half off for good behaviour and another three off for pleading guilty? Doesn't sound to me like he will be serving the full tariff. It might not be for murder but it was a life sentence nevertheless, and therefore the same rules apply.

It's always the same, the headline tariff always screams "will serve a minimum of" or "no less than", which helpfully keeps the public from getting too angry, but all that does is tell the world the figure before the various reductions are applied.

Incidentally, 'Parole' is nothing to do with time off for pleading guilty or time off for good behaviour. It's a separate mechanism that allows the prisoner to occasionally try his luck at getting out again, by showing his 'remorse' or the fact that he's suddenly found god.

Me, I'd hang 'em all.
 
#20
Beat them thrice an hour with rotten salmon for the remainder of their stinking lives!!
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top