Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

AIBU to think 17 years each seems too lenient here?

41 replies

HelloDenise · 13/08/2026 22:19

Honeytrap thieves jailed for killing men they had drugged - BBC News https://share.google/gaRt4scZ5voYPwhZC

Just reading this article. It's the first I've heard of it. Both these victims were married men.

The perpetrators only got 17 years each for this.

OP posts:
Digerydont · 13/08/2026 23:38

MiceSpiders · 13/08/2026 23:37

GBH isn't about how you feel, it's defined.
The offence of Administering a noxious substance s24 OAPA 1861 carries a maximum sentence of 5 years

Show quote history

It includes causing MH issues.

MiceSpiders · 13/08/2026 23:37

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Reported

MiceSpiders · 13/08/2026 23:37

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

GBH isn't about how you feel, it's defined.
The offence of Administering a noxious substance s24 OAPA 1861 carries a maximum sentence of 5 years

Digerydont · 13/08/2026 23:36

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Digerydont · 13/08/2026 23:34

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Deadleaves77 · 13/08/2026 23:33

I dont think 17 years for manslaughter is a massively light sentence

The men being married doesn't mean anything does it? Apart from the fact they were willing to pay for access to women's bodies despite being married. Would it be less of a crime if the men were single?

MiceSpiders · 13/08/2026 23:28

Digerydont · 13/08/2026 23:28

They will serve 5 years under the quick release scheme and then claim asylum. They won't be able to work and will then claim benefits for 50 years.

That calculation is incorrect. I work in criminal justice.

Digerydont · 13/08/2026 23:28

They will serve 5 years under the quick release scheme and then claim asylum. They won't be able to work and will then claim benefits for 50 years.

MiceSpiders · 13/08/2026 23:27

Digerydont · 13/08/2026 23:25

They drugged their victims, and then they died, how isn't that murder? 2 tier justice once again. Burnham's Britain.

Show quote history

I would imagine they didn't fulfill the mens rea for murder (malice aforethought). It sounds like the intent was to sedate and rob, rather than kill. You need to prove intent to cause GBH or death for murder. Would be difficult to prove that beyond all reasonable doubt in this case.

Digerydont · 13/08/2026 23:25

MiceSpiders · 13/08/2026 23:23

They were convicted of manslaughter, murder does carry a mandatory life sentence

Show quote history

They drugged their victims, and then they died, how isn't that murder? 2 tier justice once again. Burnham's Britain.

MiceSpiders · 13/08/2026 23:23

Digerydont · 13/08/2026 23:19

Murderers should get full life terms, unless there are extenuating circumstances, i.E. mental health issues. They need to understand that society is doing them a big favour by not hanging them, and be appropriately grateful.

They were convicted of manslaughter, murder does carry a mandatory life sentence

Digerydont · 13/08/2026 23:23

One of their victims was 80.

MiceSpiders · 13/08/2026 23:22

And yet it would've been easily avoided by not trying to buy a woman's body to use. Married men yes, honourable men, no.

Digerydont · 13/08/2026 23:19

Murderers should get full life terms, unless there are extenuating circumstances, i.E. mental health issues. They need to understand that society is doing them a big favour by not hanging them, and be appropriately grateful.

NuffSaidSam · 13/08/2026 23:17

YANBU

lovingthebeachlife · 13/08/2026 23:13

17 yrs is a joke