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

It must be awful for ALL victims if an offender is on the list for early release so spare a thought for them too.

'Full of hor air'. How patronising. I'm furious that these killers are being patted on their heads and sent on their way as you should be too.

There are enough police/court documentaries for us all to know many people get murder when they hadn't set off that morning with an 'I'm going to murder someone today' idea in their heads but when circumstances change and they intend to then it is indeed murder.

Prove they knew it was an adult.

Prove they knew it wasn't the quad bike, or a branch, or another piece of debris.

In the dark, in a car with no lights on, in a chaotic situation. Prove they knew beyond any reasonable doubt that it was a human they were pulling.

Prove it. Go on.

'Oh of course they must have known" isn't evidence, no matter how much you wish it to be''

It should have been evidence! Anyone who drives would say you can tell if you have a flat tyre nevermind dragging an adult behind you.

They'll be banged up again so the whole thing has been a waste of time and caused immense distress to PC Harper's family and friends when other options are available to free up spaces.

They've never shown any remorse. That in itself should cancel their pathetic get out of jail free card.

So why didn't you offer your services to the prosecution team? If you're so confident you could have secured a murder conviction then you've let PC Harper and his family down just as badly as the prosecution and the courts. How dare you keep that information from them.

Or, maybe, you're full of hot air and don't actually understand the law.

'Manslaughter was very obviously the correct conviction here, given the sequence of events and the lack of provable intent or premeditation'

Yes we know it wasnt premeditated, there wasn't google searches on how to drag people to their death or anything. Well, not sure they use Google I believe they're illiterate.

They set out to steal but the phone call reporting the theft stated they had weapons so I think the cps could've surmised that they were indeed intending to kill anyone who got in their way and again if you drag someone a mile driving at high speeds they clearly intended to kill him then.

I hope the prosecution team have been on some refresher training courses since.

in the moment clearly intended

This is the key point. Clearly intended. Which could not be proven in the Harper case.

That is what you cannot seem to get into your head. "Oh of course they must have known" isn't evidence, no matter how much you wish it to be.

A murder conviction for these three was never possible in the circumstances. Manslaughter however very much so. Would you rather they walked free? Because if the court had gone for murder or nothing then that's where we'd be now.

I really struggle to understand the outcome of this case and why not murder. On the other hand I was not in that court room, I don’t have all of the facts to hand to make a full decision and I’m not the CPS person having to weigh everything and take a risk that they might walk free.

It's crazy isn't it. Pp saying sniffily how thick we are to not understand. I've seen people charged with murder who equally didn't have weeks of premeditation and planning but in the moment clearly intended to kill someone. Same as these 3.

So yes yes while we know they got manslaughter most with any braincells know the cps/jury/ system were very wrong and it should have been murder because whilst they may not initially intended to murder PC Harper once they'd dragged him a mile the intent was there!

Well, it sort of is!

The law was changed, but not retroactively (retroactive change would offend the rule of law).

Although tbf, it changed the sentencing to be on par with murder, rather than turning manslaughter into murder, in these circumstances.

That isn’t how the law works. Fortunately.

It’s a bloody joke. It’s difficult to get to court, difficult to get a sentence. It costs a lot too. Rape as we all know is bloody difficult to get someone imprisoned. And then they were seriously just going to let them all back out again?? Thank goodness Andy Burnham has ruled sex offenders out of early release. But others still want them out.

It’s also notable that we are of course talking about the men’s prisons being full. There is a major problem and it all stems from men. But you know, it’s women that are being unreasonable always to dislike or distrust men, and women that are being unreasonable to not want to propagate the male human species. The men who dismiss crimes against women and want the men committing them released are demonstrating the misogyny that fills the human species. I completely agree with the pp who said we should be emptying women’s prisons first. That it should come to this though shows that law and order is on the verge of collapse.

If it didn't fit the parameters of murder, then the parameters of murder should be changed.

@AppropriateAdult That’s correct. The two in question were in the car, but did not drive it. We must maintain the difference between manslaughter and murder and many people listen to a short angry sound bite and then think they understand the law.

Im also against victims dictating policy. They always want people locked up and the key thrown away. The government has to stand firm about the crime people are actually convicted for, not the one some people would have liked.

Bring back the rope.

They can magic migrant camps from nowhere.

Its not going to be as secure no but stick them all in their with tags on as backup is better than releasing them full stop.

A jurors duty is to decide whether the prosecution has established, beyond a reasonable doubt, each of the elements of an offence. You take an oath to that effect.

Even if you think it "morally good" to resolutely make a "legally bad" decision in the moment, you'd be increasing the likelihood of a mistrial.

Thats not how it works. 😂

I hope I am never on a jury, too. But I would've felt it my duty to find hem guilty of murder. And I would have held out.

Hopefully you'll never be on a jury. The law is the law, and should be properly applied. None of us are immune to angry responses to heinous crimes but we should never just chuck the law out of window in favor of our own emotions.

‘Murder’ and ‘manslaughter’ are legal terms with very precise definitions, not ones you can just select based on how terrible you personally think a crime was. You would have been remiss in your duty as a juror if you had taken that stance.

Manslaughter was very obviously the correct conviction here, given the sequence of events and the lack of provable intent or premeditation.

Surely, Burnham can find an exuse not to release these scumbags?

Its ben confirmed that his killers WILL be released early. It was on tonight's news.
I hope Andy Pandy is proud of himself 😡

Nothing wrong with me, just fed up with the people who prey on the hard-working, honest citizen.

In which case there would have been a minority verdict.