Baby Peter the Verdict

[Calaen]

Well the verdict is in.

To m it seems far to lenient, The mere thought of what they did makes me think they should all be punished for the rest of their lives, yet after every mention of a sentence they are telling us the minium time they all must spend locked away.

How can what they did to that poor child be payed for with a minimum time of 10 years? one of them even raped another two year old. It's a fecking disgrace.

BBC NEWS | England | London | Baby P mother jailed indefinitely

 

[Mabs]

its these people who campaign about "rights" for criminals

no, sorry

if you want to operate outside the system, thats fine, but dont you dare try and hide behind it when your caught

Life sentence should be, well, life, or at least "until your 70" or somesuch

its a disgrace, why do those idiotic talking heads never stop and say "oh what about the human rights of the children that are dead"

 

[old.user4556]

Give them concrete shoes and throw them in the sea.

 

[caLLous]

And what was that apology to the judge about yesterday? How about you apologise to your dead son you evil ****.

 

[Wazzerphuk]

Don't like the fuss over this case.

Hundreds of cases like this every year, just one gets chosen by the media and pushed permanently.

Yes it's horrible, yes the people are horrible, but why isolate just this case? Fucking hate the media sometimes.

 

[Zenith.UK]

So you get 12 years for killing your g/f's son and life for raping a 2 yr old girl. Then there's a specific mention of "No less than 10 years" meaning he could conceivably be out of jail in 10 years.

When Howard Hughes murdered Sophie Hook in 1995, he was given 3 life sentences and a Home Secretary said that he should never be released from prison.

What's the difference?

 

[rynnor]

The death sentence was made for these people - more humane than life in prison and tbh for these types of crime theres no way back.

You may be able to re-habilitate thieves but people so fundamentally lacking basic human empathy cannot be helped - they will never be fit to live in society.

 

[Mabs]

So you get 12 years for killing your g/f's son and life for raping a 2 yr old girl. Then there's a specific mention of "No less than 10 years" meaning he could conceivably be out of jail in 10 years.

When Howard Hughes murdered Sophie Hook in 1995, he was given 3 life sentences and a Home Secretary said that he should never be released from prison.

What's the difference?

"human rights" , apparently

EU courts said you cannot give "her majestys pleasure" any more, cos its -not fair- they are required to give a minimum term now

 

[rynnor]

"human rights" , apparently

EU courts said you cannot give "her majestys pleasure" any more, cos its -not fair- they are required to give a minimum term now

There were difficulties in this case since none of the co-defendants would say who had done what to baby P. Thus they were charged under a new offence of 'causing or allowing a childs death' which has a max sentence of 14 years.

Not sure that was a great idea tbh - pretty sure a jury would have convicted them of murder/manslaughter if they'd had the choice but blame the CPS.

Incidentally no-one got the maximum allowable sentence which begs the question of how bad a case has to be to merit it?

 

[Mabs]

There were difficulties in this case since none of the co-defendants would say who had done what to baby P. Thus they were charged under a new offence of 'causing or allowing a childs death' which has a max sentence of 14 years.

Not sure that was a great idea tbh - pretty sure a jury would have convicted them of murder/manslaughter if they'd had the choice but blame the CPS.

Incidentally no-one got the maximum allowable sentence which begs the question of how bad a case has to be to merit it?

thats the shit system tho
IMO :

you have 3 people, who did whatever. if they cant decide who did what, then they are all responsible for all of it. fuck em , they dont deserve any benefit of the doubt

legal wranglings and justice are sadly however naff all to do with each other.

as for max sentence, are you suprised ?

i would point you at "out now cos were better thanks, living in australia in houses paid for by the tax payer" pair who killed the bulger child

 

[throdgrain]

I would pull the trigger myself on these scum.

 

[Sparx]

Little fact my dad told me (ex prison officer) with life sure they may be out in 15 but there are on probation for the rest of their life meaning if they so much as fart out of line they can be put back inside without a trial

 

[tris-]

But should they be allowed basic pleasures outside of prison?

 

[Sparx]

I think then it comes down to cost to crown, sadly money will always be important

 

[Jaberwocky]

Lads this is the maximum the judge can sentence under the current legal frame work, the crux of the issue that each of the three parties involved is denying that they were in the room when Peter suffered his fatal injury, therefore it can not be proved who would be guilty of the child's murder. Now the same the legal system has a way around this to a degree, as long as one of these individuals is considered a threat to children their release date can be deferred indefinably. Of course this only applies to the mother and the lodger since the boyfriend has already been sentenced to life for the rape of a 2 year old girl, in his case life will most likely mean he's incarcerated until he's well into his 70's.

 

[Wazzerphuk]

Christ these boards are becoming like the letters page to The Sun.

 

[Chilly]

its a fucking disgrace! bring our boys back from iraq!

 

[Mey]

Little fact my dad told me (ex prison officer) with life sure they may be out in 15 but there are on probation for the rest of their life meaning if they so much as fart out of line they can be put back inside without a trial

Exactly this is one of the misunderstood things about a life sentence.

Life really does mean life, just because you are not in prison doesn't mean you are not serving your sentence. Lifers are released on licence, and can be recalled to prison at any time for pretty much any reason.

 

[TdC]

that is somewhat strange though. if they're on life then why release them at all?

 

[Chilly]

because a calculation has been carried out showing that the risk of person a doing something to harm society is small enough to not spend much money preventing. which is fair enough. 20 years in prison will probably change a person rather a lot.

 

[Zenith]

The things they must have put the baby through is beyond horrid. Absolutely horrid.

Though I somewhat understand all the anger towards the people responsible, I dont agree with all the "death sentance" crap going around... The parents are obviously sick. Noone can really argue that. And with our current knowledge about these things, psychology being one, the chance of getting things "straight" in these things are actually really high, if they get the proper care and psychological healing, even now, when we rather just put them into jail.... Locking them up is a waste many ways, economical being just one. While I agree the thought of not "punish" them is a hard one, we as a society should really focus to the get the offenders straight, so we can understand and fix the underlying problem rather just locking up people and act on the consquenses.

 

[Mey]

because a calculation has been carried out showing that the risk of person a doing something to harm society is small enough to not spend much money preventing. which is fair enough. 20 years in prison will probably change a person rather a lot.

Spot on. There are a few whole-lifers (about 30 or so) who will never be released (more for their own safety, in all honesty), and I imagine this lot will end up amongst them aswell.

The thing with the papers is they never tell you the full sentence handed out by the judge only that he/she recommended that they should not considered for release before x peroid of time. Which whilst true, is slightly misleading as alot of the time they add conditions to it aswell.

The aim of our prison system has, and always will be Protection of the Public. It is the main reason why we have such high recividivism rates. The prison system is grossly under funded and untill this is recognised much of the money pumped into the system will contiune to be spent on suriving from day to day, not on improving conditions that would allow effective rehabilitation of offenders.

People who think that our prison system should be like some hell hole are kidding themselves. Harsh conditions serve only to seal the commitment to a criminal lifestyle (essentially offenders learn to resent the system, so commit crime purely for revenge against society - i.e society has done me wrong, so I will do it back).

The whole argument for "physical" punishment is also laughable, ironically back in the day when we hung people in public for pickpocketing the crowds that gathered served to be the best place for pickpocketers to operate. Committed criminals do not plan to be caught, so a deterent argument is illogical. Another shocking thing to come out from a deterent argument is punishment for punishments sake. I'd paraphrase the argument but the quote explains it better than I could:

"Can an argument from deterrence alone "justify" in any sense the infliction of pain on a criminal? It is particularly disquieting that the actual levying of punishment is done not for the criminal himself, but for the educational impact it will have on the community. The criminal act becomes the occasion of, but not the reason for, the punishment. The actual crime becomes little more than an excuse for punishing."

{rant off}

 

[MYstIC G]

Give them concrete shoes and throw them in the sea.

Waste of perfectly good concrete, just beat them to death.

 

[tris-]

The Young News Channel is a good place to see how prisons operate in other countries.

Cosmetically, they appear to work. For example, rapists get gang raped by other inmates etc. Now Im not expert, but I reckon the 'victim' of such a punishment is not going to be too keen on raping again after getting fucked up the arse by 10 different people and bleeding out of his intestines all over a cold concrete floor.

One thing I do wonder, though, is how someone manages to be in the prison to film it and then upload it to the net!

 

[rynnor]

The things they must have put the baby through is beyond horrid. Absolutely horrid.

Though I somewhat understand all the anger towards the people responsible, I dont agree with all the "death sentance" crap going around... The parents are obviously sick. Noone can really argue that. And with our current knowledge about these things, psychology being one, the chance of getting things "straight" in these things are actually really high, if they get the proper care and psychological healing,

No - I have spent most of my life opposing the death penalty but since studying psychology I have reached the inescapable conclusion that some people are beyond help.

You can keep em drugged up to the point that they are just shambling zombies (I have been into high security mental health wards and seen these folk) but you cannot change them.

If you cannot change them then they can never be released into society - is it fair to keep them locked up forever? I tend to think death is preferable yet its a debate that we will never have because of the taboo around the death penalty.

 

[Zenith]

Im a soontobe psychologystudent, and Im very keen on the interest for many years, and I have to completly disagree with you there...Sadly many people never get even half of what the treatment they should recieve... And drugs have nothing to do with the treatment they (should) recieve.

Sadly its a matter of economics rather than knowledge at this point, which is stupid and wrong.

 

[mooSe_]

No - I have spent most of my life opposing the death penalty but since studying psychology I have reached the inescapable conclusion that some people are beyond help.

You can keep em drugged up to the point that they are just shambling zombies (I have been into high security mental health wards and seen these folk) but you cannot change them.

If you cannot change them then they can never be released into society - is it fair to keep them locked up forever? I tend to think death is preferable yet its a debate that we will never have because of the taboo around the death penalty.

People shouldn't be killed just because they don't fit in with society.

 

[Yoni]

People shouldn't be killed just because they don't fit in with society.

People shouldn't be killed end of :|

 

[old.user4556]

I dunno Yoni, I don't have a lot of sympathy for murderers, rapists and vile child abusers/molesters.

 

[mooSe_]

People shouldn't be killed end of :|

I agree