Well you disprove that with every post you make!
I'm sorry to be a broken record but ...
- Thread starter diy_fun_uk
- Start date
Sponsored Links
- Joined
- 17 May 2012
- Messages
- 10,816
- Reaction score
- 859
- Country
I sat on a jury once with a few people who took that attitude. "just can tell by his eyes he did it".
It was going to be a challenge to get a unanimous decision, but luckily the judge threw the case out before it came to that.
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 17,444
- Reaction score
- 2,647
- Country
There are some misunderstandings about what a life sentence is.
Murder carries a mandatory life sentence. That means even if a murderer is reformed and released on licence after say 10 years in jail, they can be recalled to prison at any point for pretty much any offence. The sentence is never spent either under rehabilitation of offenders legislation. Minimum terms are exactly that, the minimum they have to serve. No matter how well reformed they become.
Someone sentenced to life with a min of 38 years, is not eligible for parole until that time and only then if he can prove he is fully reformed. His chances will be slim, but who can say what will be in 40 years time.
What you have to balance is the cost of housing prisoners who no prospect of getting out. For them there can be no incentive to behave and it costs a lot to house such prisoners.
Murder carries a mandatory life sentence. That means even if a murderer is reformed and released on licence after say 10 years in jail, they can be recalled to prison at any point for pretty much any offence. The sentence is never spent either under rehabilitation of offenders legislation. Minimum terms are exactly that, the minimum they have to serve. No matter how well reformed they become.
Someone sentenced to life with a min of 38 years, is not eligible for parole until that time and only then if he can prove he is fully reformed. His chances will be slim, but who can say what will be in 40 years time.
What you have to balance is the cost of housing prisoners who no prospect of getting out. For them there can be no incentive to behave and it costs a lot to house such prisoners.
Sponsored Links
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 17,444
- Reaction score
- 2,647
- Country
Magistrates don't understand beyond reasonable doubt, let alone Jury members.
Just look at the Woodward - Killer Nanny case - convicted because she laughed nervously while on the stand and looked uneasy. One Juror said, she obviously didn't kill him deliberately, but he died so she has to pay - the charge was Murder.
Just look at the Woodward - Killer Nanny case - convicted because she laughed nervously while on the stand and looked uneasy. One Juror said, she obviously didn't kill him deliberately, but he died so she has to pay - the charge was Murder.
PMSL...
You wouldn't have the balls if it actually came to it!
They'd have to give you the blindfold
Judges set the tariff based on the law and on sentencing guidelines.... why are they not just locking scum like this up for ACTUAL life?!?
Moment Zara Aleena's 'savage' killer is arrested in squalid caravan
Jordan McSweeney, 29, was tracked down by the Metropolitan Police to his caravan, and appeared 'confused' and 'dazed' when officers arrested him for Zara Aleena's savage murder.www.dailymail.co.uk
Why should he have even a glimmer of hope of being free in his 60s?!?
Just can't get my head around it.
they can’t change the law
I remember watching the trial at the time. I never thought she did it, I seem to recall it was possible it could’ve been one of the parents or the brother.Magistrates don't understand beyond reasonable doubt, let alone Jury members.
Just look at the Woodward - Killer Nanny case - convicted because she laughed nervously while on the stand and looked uneasy. One Juror said, she obviously didn't kill him deliberately, but he died so she has to pay - the charge was Murder.
It showed how bad the American legal system is.
You’d be standing by, weeping into a hanky.PMSL...
You wouldn't have the balls if it actually came to it!
They'd have to give you the blindfold
- Joined
- 22 Aug 2006
- Messages
- 5,786
- Reaction score
- 704
- Country
It's a multi-faceted question. I don't fancy trying a complete analysis of it, but you can consider the hypothetical case, where there's no question of guilt.
If the guy admits all he wants to do is rape and kill, and yes he did it several times, and he was filmed doing it, and he says that if he gets the slightest chance that's what he's going to do for the rest of his life.
Then what do you do?
You could give him therapy, then he might "get better".
You might be able to drug him so he had no interest in such activities.
You could offer him a painless death.
You could use him for drug trials, until one of them made him useless, then kill him.
You could put him in solitary with gruel until he died of something or other, but that may be considered cruel, but maybe that is what he deserves.
You could keep him confined, and given drugs which cause him great mental and physical pain until he dies - why not? If he deserves punishment, how much punishment?
If the guy admits all he wants to do is rape and kill, and yes he did it several times, and he was filmed doing it, and he says that if he gets the slightest chance that's what he's going to do for the rest of his life.
Then what do you do?
You could give him therapy, then he might "get better".
You might be able to drug him so he had no interest in such activities.
You could offer him a painless death.
You could use him for drug trials, until one of them made him useless, then kill him.
You could put him in solitary with gruel until he died of something or other, but that may be considered cruel, but maybe that is what he deserves.
You could keep him confined, and given drugs which cause him great mental and physical pain until he dies - why not? If he deserves punishment, how much punishment?
Actually I'd be crying with laughter at someone who claims to be 'tough', but who in actual fact would be showing a tell tale yellow streak down his trousers!
A hypothetical case indeed, but as yet one never put before a court...
So what do you actually define as 'no question of guilt' in the real world?
Sure someone can confess, but is that 100% proof of guilt?
After all there are numerous cases of confession under duress, or confession due to mental health issues...
- Joined
- 22 Aug 2006
- Messages
- 5,786
- Reaction score
- 704
- Country
Bruises, dna, video. What else would you want?
Everyone on the planet knows an admission isn't proof. It would be a necessary but insufficient condition. There is no need to waste our time with your captious folderol.
Nonetheless, the question is still valid.
This bloke is 100% guilty
Who subjected this young lady to an horrific assault
Execute the scum bag
As I under stand it he did not turn up in court for sentencing
Hmmm if I had any say in the matter he would have turned up to plead for his life on his knees
There after taken to a suitable location and dispatched to the next life
Who subjected this young lady to an horrific assault
Execute the scum bag
As I under stand it he did not turn up in court for sentencing
Hmmm if I had any say in the matter he would have turned up to plead for his life on his knees
There after taken to a suitable location and dispatched to the next life
- Joined
- 22 Aug 2006
- Messages
- 5,786
- Reaction score
- 704
- Country
Sponsored Links
