to think that there needs to be a national overhaul of sentencing guidelines?

[tittytittyhanghang]

And that those dishing them out need to adhere closely to them? How can this man or this woman get roughly the same sentence as this pair?

It feels like everyday I read the papers and criminals are not getting sentences fitting of their crimes. Surely there is no one who agrees that the coal bunker pair only deserved two years. And god knows how long they will actually serve. Half probably if they are lucky? Don't even get me started on this shocking sentence.

Am I the only one that feels this way? Lets plough some money into building more jails which will create more jobs and more prison spaces, because Im pretty sure prison overcrowding has a lot to answer for with some of these sentences!

This is going to be upsetting for some, but the way that V and T lied to passers by when marching James to his death etc, made it completely different. They then returned home as though nothing happened.

I live not far from the JB killing and remember it step by step. I also knew of the family of V and B, who went to the pub the weekend after their sons arrest and expected nothing said.

I'd agree we need courts to treat violent and sexual crime as far more serious than property crime - except where property crime creates injury or risks lives. We need to get rid of disgusting judges who hand out lenient sentences because a 13yo girl 'was a willing participant' or 'looked older'. And we do need to focus on rehabilitation - if only for the pragmatic reasons that almost all prisoners will be released eventually, and it'd be better for everyone if they didn't go on to commit more crimes.

Prisons are horrible, miserable places, full of people with mental illnesses or addictions, and there are so many people in them that the opportunity for rehabilitation is very limited. Locking up people who are mentally ill is stupid, cruel and does more damage, not less. Locking up people who are addicted in a place where that addiction will only get worse is equally stupid. People who are ill need treatment. Addicts need a different kind of treatment. Some violent people need to be shown that there are different ways to live - some of them are the products of horrendous childhoods and have never learnt how to live a decent life.

edam I completely agree. I have never understood the complete disconnect between 'victim' and 'perpetrator'. When child sexual abuse has been ongoing through generations, how is one person a victim until they offend themselves, knowing no better, then they are a perpetrator who deserves to be locked up forever? Someone who is mentally ill and addicted, until those things are dealt with, I don't understand how they are not a victim.

In some cases, the perps are victims too, many people forget this!

Actually IMO in the UK people all too often forget the victims are the innocent ones.

No one is suggesting 'lock them up forever' but there should be custodial sentences for all crimes that have a sexual element, especially when directed towards children.

Viewing the highest category of child porn does not always mean that the convicted will go to prison. When most perpertrators are finally convicted there is usually a list of accussations that the CPS have refused to take up.

The general public, including previous partners of the criminal, deserve protection.

Likewise the perpetrator isn't helped by a lack proper rehabilitation programmes combined with a short sentence.

I have seen younger men have crimes ignored until they go further in their criminal activity and then have their life taken from them by the sentencing. Sometimes it is better to deal effectively with lesser crimes that research shows are 'gateway' crimes.

Actually, the three strikes rule was mentioned, which means locking someone up for life.

i mentioned it but i quite like the idea of three strikes and your out for a good spell like 10/15 years. Unless its a cold blooded planned out murder or some sexual crime (against children especially) and then I think I could live with locking them up and throwing away the key so to speak.

The UK cannot impose that rule because we are subject to the guidelines/laws etc set as a member of the EU, Court of Human Rights etc.

Under the 'three strikes' rule often the first crime is only given a short sentence, regardless of what it is for.

I hate the idea of a three strikes rule. A few reasons. It is barbaric to lock someone up for 10-15 years for a shoplifting charge. They have been sentenced for the other crimes (the two previous ones) so I don't understand the logic. I do understand that chronic recidivism is bad but still.

Also, what is the motivation not to use a gun or a knife when you are on your third strike. You'll get 10 years anyway. Might as well try as hard as you can to get away... No motivation to now hurt or kill someone.