Parole Board Idiots

[donotcovertheradiator]

So, murderers such as John Worboys and David McGreavey-who murdered 3 children- are to be released because despite public outrage, the parole board judges them to no longer be a danger.

As people released on parole-are still a danger-discovered when they do more harm, I have a helpful suggestion for the Parole Board.

One of them should sign an undertaking-become a guarantor- giving their word that this person is being released early because they are no longer a danger and if they do commit another offence, the guarantor is obliged to serve the same amount of prison time.

I hazard a guess that not so many violent criminals would be released on parole.

They should have to live next door.

I agree with you.

Should also be extended to Judges and Magistrates when they decide to go for a non-custodial sentence.

John Worboys was neither accused of, nor tried for, nor convicted of murder

One of them should sign an undertaking-become a guarantor- giving their word that this person is being released early because they are no longer a danger and if they do commit another offence, the guarantor is obliged to serve the same amount of prison time.

Patently absurd. All parole officers can do is make the best decision they feel able to make with the info available to them. I don’t always agree with their decisions, but I don’t think a person making a very difficult decision (that has to be made by someone) bears criminal responsibility for actions behind their control.

Should also be extended to Judges and Magistrates when they decide to go for a non-custodial sentence.

And this is straightforwardly dystopian!

Judges aren’t responsible for the actions of criminals. They are bound by guidelines, and have to do their best to make a decision which is proportionate, based on often conflicting information. We should be grateful that there are people willing to make these decisions, not claim they bear some bizarre responsibility-by-proxy for criminals.

Individuals in all sorts of management jobs now face prosecution by the Health and Safety Executive if things go awry on their watch.

The justice system in this country is a joke.
I watched the evil bastard who murdered my Dd walk free on a NOT PROVEN verdict in Scotland.

Please read ‘Secret Barrister’ or at laest stop taking legal advice from a tabloid ....

I think all decisions should be made by social media rule. As long as uninformed people make enough noise that decision should be binding.

Ah yes because someone should be totally responsible for someone elses behaviour. They make the decision based on facts not on the opinion of some random on the internet.

If someone decides to let a murderous criminal free ahead of completing the original sentence, inflicting that person on society-asking society to take that risk-then they should put their money where their mouth is.

If they think there is a risk-at the moment it is no skin from their nose-if they decide to ignore it. making them answer for their often stupid decision would make them think on.

Faceless daft twats, inflicting their stupid decisions on the rest of us with no comeback.

I was going to make a post about this!

Those three children were murdered in the most awful ways, their lives cut short.

Their murderer will now be able to walk outside in the fresh air, feel the sun and the wind on his face, sing and laugh, feed the ducks over the park if he so wishes and a million other joyful things that the living can do in society.

He was given life so should remain incarcerated until he dies.

It’s an insult to those children and their parents and family that he is set free.

You’re just betraying an astonishing depth of ignorance at the entire judicial process. Public policy is, thankfully, written by people who have a more informed view.

It is a shocking case Soola.

John Worboys was neither accused of, nor tried for, nor convicted of murder

Don't come on here with your stupid facts, you'll ruin a good Daily Mail style rant.

@Soola - the law is very clear that a life sentence doesn't mean the prisoner will never be released UNLESS they're given a whole life term. He became eligible for parole in 1993, so he's served considerably longer than his minimum term...

It's shocking that McGreavy has been released, his crimes were awful. The triple murder and mutilation of three young children deserves a full life sentence.

Yeah but the decision follows the rules of the system (designed by our betters) so it must be fine..

I imagine a few of the parole board are yakking on this thread.

If they are happy a murderous/violent criminal is no risk then why not be a guarantor! They're happy to let out a man who killed three children in cold blood so I jolly well hope they are 100% convinced he is no danger.

If they are 100% convinced, then why not be a guarantor. If they don't want to risk that, why inflict these cunts on the rest of us.

Murderers/ rapists offend when on parole and they wouldn't be on that parole if some daft twat hadn't allowed them to be. They are culpable for allowing it, for taking a risk for the rest of us, without any comeback.

How many would be allowed back on the streets if the daft twats on the parole Board had to answer for it when the criminal re-offends. Not many is the answer and you can stuff that fact up your patrician noses!

His minimum sentence was 20 years so he has taken another 26 years to pass parole board rules.

I think it depends on whether you want an eye for an eye type justice or to rehabilitate. I'm completely comfortable with the fact that mass killers should never be released. I can also see that someone can change beyond recognition after 46 years.

You’re essentially suggesting that parole should never be possible for any crime. That’s the only logical conclusion, because no parole officer would ever allow someone parole if it meant taking on the responsibility you suggest.

So what’s your solution for the consequential overfilling of prisons? Remember - nobody is going to be paroled ever again, because no parole officer is going to take the risk. So are you going for higher taxes? Cuts to other services?

Your argument is pure emotion, and based on a total failure to understand the criminal justice system or public policy. You’re entitled to hold your view regardless, but please don’t expect it to be taken seriously.

Oh dear.
Someone call the daily mail.
One of their readers have escaped the asylum

I'm sure the parole board take into account the risk the prisoner poses before release. If you don't think that's stringent enough blame the government as I'm sure they ultimately own the parole process.

Criminals do reoffend on parole it's true. So clearly the decisions they make are not always correct, but the other choice is to lock up people forever (and we the tax payer fund this) which is going to very costly.

Should there be more oversight of those on parole? Yes absolutely. However, the criminal justice budget has been cut to the bone and the result is going to be more leniency, mistakes and unrest in our society about how we treat criminals once they have served a sentence. It's storm cloud brewing.

Everyone says they are happy to fund the NHS at a higher rate but what about criminal justice? As PP says read the Secret Barrister book. It will scare/anger/astonish you.

I won't bore you with facts as I imagine it's not what you made the thread for, but the Parole Board's test for release is actually very rigorous, and there are some internal processes in the cases where the Board releases someone on licence and they reoffend.

McGreavys crime is horrible but objectively not terribly worse than others, it's just been more publicised.