Poor punishment for Killers?

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by mukhabarat2003, Nov 28, 2006.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. in_the_cheapseats

    in_the_cheapseats LE Moderator

    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
  2. So they will be out in about 10 years, still young enough to be a danger to society at large.
  3. 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.
  4. 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
  5. If by study you mean vivisection, Im all for it!
  6. 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.
  7. 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.
  8. As this Country seems to be past masters at privatisation perhaps we should ask China to deal with the sentencing.
  9. 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.
  10. 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.

  11. No the sentace was life with a minimum of 21 and 17 years given to each. Still to short by half.
  12. 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
  13. 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!)
  14. 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.