Reply to: Anyone else think these two got off lightly?

[Churchill]

On the other hand it might be amuzing to see Minestrone in a boxing ring with Churchill!

Most amusing...

[BrilloPad]

I am flattered you follow my movements so closely. IIRC I was away at the time; sorry I wasn't able to stroke your ego for you by replying promptly.

than

No doubt that was another of your oh-so-clever 'traps' you put in just to catch me out. Yeah, right. You're just upset because nobody was impressed that you did a lot of fighting when younger - misjudged your audience there, didn't you?. Some of us think that is pathetic: boxing is an alternative to an education.

On the other hand it might be amuzing to see Minestrone in a boxing ring with Churchill!

[BrowneIssue]

You are the one that told me last month that the saying "the English Language" was an Americanism.

When I informed you that Dr Samuel Johnson wrote "A Dictionary of the English Language" in 1746 and the United states was created in 1776 you soon scuttled off back to your corner.

When you want to try and put someone down at least try and have a higher standard of education that them.

I am flattered you follow my movements so closely. IIRC I was away at the time; sorry I wasn't able to stroke your ego for you by replying promptly.

than

No doubt that was another of your oh-so-clever 'traps' you put in just to catch me out. Yeah, right. You're just upset because nobody was impressed that you did a lot of fighting when younger - misjudged your audience there, didn't you?. Some of us think that is pathetic: boxing is an alternative to an education.

[minestrone]

I don't need to. The average sentence for murder is 14.9 years according to official statistics. If you halve that for good behaviour you get 7.5 years served. The average served prior to 1997 was 13 years approx. It's a scandal and it is Blair that you can thank.

I asked you to give me one name of a premeditated murderer who committed murder since Blair came in that is now released, you cannot.

In case you have not realised from my previous posts I worked in that 'business' for a good few years.

Name me one premeditated murderer that has been convicted and released since 1997?

If you can't then shut up.

[Cyberman]

Name me one premeditate murderer that has been released since 1997.

I don't need to. The average sentence for murder is 14.9 years according to official statistics. If you halve that for good behaviour you get 7.5 years served. The average served prior to 1997 was 13 years approx. It's a scandal and it is Blair that you can thank.

[minestrone]

You're such a plonker. Of course some murderers have been released since 1997. The average served by murderers is well under 12 years thanks to Blair and is approx 7-8 years, and I provided data a few months ago to prove this. On top of that over a 100 have come out and committed further murders since 1997.

Name me one premeditate murderer that has been released since 1997.

[minestrone]

Blimey. All that brain damage and you can still use a computer.

Well done.

Say, where'd you nick the PC, pikey?

Are are you using the prison facilities?

You are the one that told me last month that the saying "the English Language" was an Americanism.

When I informed you that Dr Samuel Johnson wrote "A Dictionary of the English Language" in 1746 and the United states was created in 1776 you soon scuttled off back to your corner.

When you want to try and put someone down at least try and have a higher standard of education that them.

[Cyberman]

You know bugger all about anything you pretend to this board you know something about.

Yes there has been the possibility of a minimum 5 year stretch for a murder which has never been used but actual time spent for a murder has never been reduced.

No one that has committed a premeditate murder since 1997 has been released.

You're such a plonker. Of course some murderers have been released since 1997. The average served by murderers is well under 12 years thanks to Blair and is approx 7-8 years, and I provided data a few months ago to prove this. On top of that over a 100 have come out and committed further murders since 1997.

[minestrone]

Sentences are lighter for murder than they were before 1997 after reforms that Blair made

You know bugger all about anything you pretend to this board you know something about.

Yes there has been the possibility of a minimum 5 year stretch for a murder which has never been used but actual time spent for a murder has never been reduced.

No one that has committed a premeditate murder since 1997 has been released.

[NotAllThere]

I still don't get how whatever sentence is dished out is really only half that.

So she gets 18 months, has been in remand for 9 months so may not go to jail

4 years for him is light enough, but that really means 2 - when did half sentences become normal?

Because your general thicko public, and CUK member, have no grasp on what happens in the legal system, beyond what they read in the papers.

After you've served half your sentence, you're eligible for parole. If you get parole, you're let out on license. That means, if you do ANYTHING criminal during that period - back to prison.

Same as when a murder on "life" is let out. But they're on parole for life.

You also have to tell the police and the probation service where you are and what you are doing, during the time you're on parole. It's kind of "ok pal, we'll let you out, but if you misbehave "

For most crimes, it works out. But the way the criminal justice system works, sometimes those who would seem to deserve a harsher penalty get less, and those who deserve a more lenient penalty get more. Ultimately, it's up to the judgement of the judge, within the rules set down. Some are disconnected from reality, most are just doing a ******* difficult job.

There's an adage. Hard cases make bad laws. You decide - is it better that some scumbag goes to prison for four years when they "deserved" ten, than someone who just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time goes down for four years when they "deserve" probation.

tulip. You don't like it - go for summary justice. Sharia law - you'd like that. Or get elected as an MP, eventually head of party, and get the law changed.

Self-righteous pillocks. The only difference between any of us, and "criminals", is that we've not been in the circumstance where we thought we could get away with it. Said circumstance could, of course, be that we paid attention in school and didn't listen to the ****heads around...

[Cyberman]

Half sentences became "normal" around the time the sentencing rules were changed to prevent prison governers adding time onto prisoners sentences for misdemeanours inside. This power was taken away when a prisoner sued the system and his lawyer successfully argued that this was tantamount to sentencing him to further prison time without a trial by his peers for the offence of which he was accused. Sentences were typically alot shorter back then because they could be extended at the authorities whim.

In order to get around this loss of power, the sentencing guidelines were changed so that sentences were longer, but those who behaved got out early - or as near to the length of time they would have served under the old regime - whereas those who didn't could be kept in for the full duration of their sentence or until granted parole if sentence to over 4 years.

So in actual fact sentences are not more lenient than in the past - despite what the Daily Fail and other redtops would have you believe.

At least this is how it was explained to me in the past and seems to make sense.

Sentences are lighter for murder than they were before 1997 after reforms that Blair made, and there have been previous discussions on here where I provided hard evidence. Also, with so many prisoners given early release because of the overcrowding in prisons, of course sentences served have become shorter and thus lighter.

[BrilloPad]

Inciting assault that resulted in a manslaughter.

10-12 years to the guy and at least 5-7 for her would have been by far more appropriate. Maybe the other way around.

WHS

[the_rangdo]

So in actual fact sentences are not more lenient than in the past - despite what the Daily Fail and other redtops would have you believe.

Not that I read either, but what this pair got handed down to them would suggest sentences are more leniant.

4 years should mean just that, good behaviour should be a standard requirement, not something that earns you time-off credits.

[JamieMoles]

4 years for him is light enough, but that really means 2 - when did half sentences become normal?

Half sentences became "normal" around the time the sentencing rules were changed to prevent prison governers adding time onto prisoners sentences for misdemeanours inside. This power was taken away when a prisoner sued the system and his lawyer successfully argued that this was tantamount to sentencing him to further prison time without a trial by his peers for the offence of which he was accused. Sentences were typically alot shorter back then because they could be extended at the authorities whim.

In order to get around this loss of power, the sentencing guidelines were changed so that sentences were longer, but those who behaved got out early - or as near to the length of time they would have served under the old regime - whereas those who didn't could be kept in for the full duration of their sentence or until granted parole if sentence to over 4 years.

So in actual fact sentences are not more lenient than in the past - despite what the Daily Fail and other redtops would have you believe.

At least this is how it was explained to me in the past and seems to make sense.

[Cyberman]

No there isn't - in the UK or any other country with a half decent justice system.

You can go to live in Iran if you want this kind of "justice".

A person can appeal against the length of a sentence issued against him/herself, so it should only be fair if it could also be the other way round.