AIBU to think PC Harper's killers being released early is awful?

Sentencing laws were changed as a result of this case.

For the worse, in my view, but there we go.

Lawyers are ‘normal people’. They,
more than many, have a complete understanding of the consequences of our justice system.
You think lawyers are immune to crime??
They don’t make the laws we live by. Politicians do. The House of Commons (voted for by you) and the House of Lords. Many of our laws (particularly those relating to crimes committed by humanity since the dawn of time, like killing each other) are centuries old.
Changes in the law caused by specific cases are rare, and that is exactly how it should be. The death of this policeman is an utter tragedy and this crime is a nasty one that should carry the highest sentence our laws allow. BUT this case should not equate to different sentencing simply because he was a policeman and it was on social media. A man was killed in a fairly similar circumstance a road away from me this last year. Would there be similar uproar for his killers?

Nobody is saying otherwise.

Learn to read.

They are.

Where from? We all know there is no money. We need to spend more on just about everything and it’s all a priority - defence, the justice system, prisons, social care. As we are so often reminded there is no magic money tree, however much political will there might be.

Build more prisons. If there's the political will, they can find the money.

So just collapse murder, voluntary manslaughter and involuntary manslaughter into the same offence, full stop?

I'm far from convinced that's a popular point of view among the general public.

Reckless endangerment resulting in death should be murder. Especially when it involves criminals fleeing from a law enforcement officer and killing the officer in the process.

What do you think the will of the people on this issue is?

Genuinely, I'm not sure I've ever really heard people argue that some crimes currently labeled as "manslaughter" should be redesignated as "murder".

Do you think there should be any legal difference between intentionally killing someone and unintentional, reckless killing?

I guess we could adopt a US-style degrees or murder. Most US states only have 1st (premeditated) and 2nd (unplanned) murder, but some have 3rd degree which I think would cover recklessness.

I’m on the fence with this one. The driver won’t be released early. The passengers might be. There are a lot of victims out there who all want justice and deserve it. PC Harpers family and their anguish is well published but not many people have this. They need their justice too.
It’s a tricky one and I feel for everyone who is a victim of crime and affected by this.
In an ideal world I would have the prison system that they now have in El Salvador. Literally lock em up and throw away the key.

Not to mob rule, but the will of the people. IE democracy.

'And of course assuming each country involved simply agrees to take back their national in the first place'

Oh that's where negotiations come in. Clearly it isn't an immediate fix but it should be a long term plan to kick out the 10k foreign nationals, instead of the lame 'they can't do anything because other countries won't like it' excuses we keep hearing.

Well of course it's a drop in the ocean but perhaps a snap shot of how millions are being wasted.

If the council linked can afford to pay 4.5million of public money on sites like this then maybe other councils are blowing money on crap things too. The government should perhaps cut budgets and the collective savings may help wirh the current crisis?

The £4.2m comes from local authorities' housing budgets, and is a drop in thr ocean compared to the billions needed to rebuild and expand our prison infrastructure.

Regrettably, the Tories really fucked this up between 2010 - 2024, and now we're paying the price.

And if we run out of prison space, and start using emergency measures such as police cells, which I think is what would happen, where do we put people who might otherwise be placed there?

And how long do you imagine this swap would take, given that we are rapidly running out of prison space? Given separate negotiations with each country, legal challenges, appeals etc?
And of course assuming each country involved simply agrees to take back their national in the first place.

Common sense from a UK perspective, perhaps - and the opposite for any country who would be receiving more than they would be sending back.

Do a swap! Boot out the 10k foreign nationals and bring back the approx 1k Brits in foreign jails. You'd think it'd be common sense to free up 9k places this way rather than release violent criminals wouldn't you.

And what do you think would happen to the British Nationals in foreign jails if we deported the foreign nationals in our jails, even if you suppose the countries in question accept them back? Do you suppose the country in question would keep the UK nationals but accept their own citizens back, to free up the UK system, but increase their own prison population? What do you do with people with dual nationality?

I don't see any good reason why the law needs changing.

I get the sense that some in here are drawn to the idea of mob rule.

Ignoring things like human rights for a moment - a pretty major hurdle with all deportations is that you need the country who would be receiving the deported individual to facilitate it. The idea of immediate mass deportations is a fantasy.

The law needs to be changed to reflect the views of normal people, not smug lawyers. After all it is the normal people who suffer the consequences of crime, and for that matter who pay for it all.

How should I know. Let’s hope they don’t get out for years and years.