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

I think there are people on here who think that because they come from a disadvantaged community, it's not their fault that they steal. If I had been on that jury, I would have emphasized that I would be prepared to starve to death before I would have concurred with anything less than guilty of murder.

If they intended to drag him, sure.

I'm not familiar with the case but, on the previous page, you yourself said they did so recklessly.

(I should say that Harper's Law changed this, so now recklessness can be sufficient mens rea if the accused was committing a crime and the victim was an on-duty emergency services worker - but that's a unique exception to the law that arose from this case and did not previously exist).

I can't work out what's wrong with you. You are either on some silly wind up, wilfully obtuse or lacking critical thought. None of which are a good look.

Precisely. It’s quite entertaining watching those completely ignorant about the law shooting their mouths off about something they know nothing about.

Dragging someone long a bumpy road does not constitute intent to cause GBH?

There are people, on Mumsnet, who think that isn't murder.
Well, they'd be correct.

Murder requires either the intention to kill or an intention to cause grievous bodily harm. Anything less than those specific intentions, including recklessness, cannot amount to murder.

Yes, but we didn't have the welfare state. There isn't the justification for crime that there was in the Victorian period. Hang'em high.

It's not. The 3 should've gone down for murder.

It’s a just verdict.

Because we had public executions yet crime persisted.

It's a perverse lefty verdict.

They should have gone down for murder. If you ask the public, I guarantee 90 per cent would agree.

Good thing it’s not back in the day then. If there had been a strong enough case for murder the prosecution would have refused the manslaughter plea.

No, they didn't they charged the driver with murder. He pleaded guilty to manslaughter. Back in the day, the jury would have found him guilty and Pierrepont would have strung him up.

The CPS decided it didn’t meet the criteria for a murder charge. Obviously you know better than them.

Yes the answer isn’t to realise people early it’s to build more prisons! Utterly ridiculous.

What an absolute shitshow, as if our justice system isn't already pathetically soft. A fucking joke when you hear on the news xxx was sentenced to a life sentence and will serve a minimum of 10 years - or suchlike. What's the point of using the word 'life sentence' then? People imprisoned for hurty words while rapists and scumbags like these cop killers are out in a few years.

They stole stuff. A police officer tried to apprehend them and lost his life because they recklessly dragged him along the road, somehow not releasing he was there. There are people, on Mumsnet, who think that isn't murder.

They didn’t commit murder. They’d have been charged with it if they had.

Yes. There should be a severe punishment for anyone who hurts or worse murders any public service worker in emergency services.
It makes a mockery of the family.
Sadly governments prioritise other things over prison space and victim support.
Terrible violent people are getting a slap on the wrist.

They should have been convicted for murder.

What’s two tier about it?

Exactly this.

It’s also two people who were present in the car. Not those that did the driving.

2 tier justice.

It was the Tories who failed to fund public services adequately during their 14-year term, including the Police, the justice system and HM Prison and Probation Service (amongst many others). Now we're in the mess we're in and it's not as if we weren't warned multiple times that this would happen. But millions of people kept on voting for the Tories anyway. And some of these people are now blaming Labour for not having rebuilt public services within just two years. You couldn't make it up.