To think a 7 year sentence is not a life sentence

[viques]

Wendall Baker was convicted in 2013 of the brutal beating, rape and imprisonment of a 66 year old woman. He was given a life sentence, but the parole board have now decided that he is no longer a danger to the public and is to be paroled . The man cruelly and remorselessly brutalised a woman and subjected her to the most appalling ordeal. He is still a danger to women, someone with his mindset should never be allowed to walk free.

What is it with parole boards and rapists. Remember Warboys.

The conviction rates for rape in the UK is appalling, luckily there was DNA to prove his guilt, though it took two trials thanks to incompetent police and judicial work , but for heavens sake, once one of the bastards is behind bars is it too much to expect them to bloody be kept there.

@viques your comment about the Probation interventions this individual will receive are completely inaccurate. The risk management plan and licence will be far more exhaustive than a curfew and restrictions on living arrangements. There will also be MAPPA management, regular home visits, close supervision of all activities and a host of other measures, some of which don’t require public debate but have public protection at their core.

Because a man who gets gratification from brutalising a woman in such a way won't change and once he's free to do it again he will. Would you want him near you, your mother, your daughter?

and, and yes, I'm now shouting, so here goes....WHY GIVE HIM A LIFE SENTENCE IF IT'S NOT GOING TO BE THAT?
FFS, hand out a sentence , give it, and stick to it.

Actual whole life sentences are very rare and generally considered incompatible with international human rights legislation

And that's how the whole thing became completely out of balance - when the rights of offenders started to receive more attention than the rights of everyone else to be kept safe

We all know the probation service don't stand a hope in hell of keeping track of everyone on licence, and there have been too many further crimes committed by those supposedly under supervision for anyone to have confidence in the current system

Except offenders themselves of course, who no doubt think it's just fine

Because a man who gets gratification from brutalising a woman in such a way won't change and once he's free to do it again he will.

OK, thanks @LaureBerthaud

WHY GIVE HIM A LIFE SENTENCE IF IT'S NOT GOING TO BE THAT?

• So that he can remain on licence for the rest of his life. No other sentence carries that level/length of supervision.

and, and yes, I'm now shouting, so here goes....WHY GIVE HIM A LIFE SENTENCE IF IT'S NOT GOING TO BE THAT?
FFS, hand out a sentence , give it, and stick to it.

Hi @Katinski,

It is a life sentence - it was explained further back in the thread.

Interesting and very timely piece here, outlining views of HM Inspectorate of Probation who presumably DO understand the process: www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/freed-prisoners-criminals-murder-rape-uk-jail-a9513046.html

So much for effective supervision

You have to be realistic - it's not possible to lock people up for life. Can you imagine how full, expensive and dangerous our prisons would be if they were full of people who had no chance of ever getting out?

Prisons need to be for the most dangerous in society as a public protection measure. Punishment can be done differently/separately. I don't know the exact details of the man you post about but if pp is correct he has spent 9 years in prison if you include time on remand as well as post sentence. Given his age and if he is now substance free as well as monitoring on license then it's short but not ridiculously so, in my opinion at least!

@puzzled you will also then have to acknowledge that the article clearly states that the percentage of offenders supervised by Probation who went on to commit a serious further offence was 0.2%. (During the time frame in question).

*Actual whole life sentences are very rare and generally considered incompatible with international human rights legislation

And that's how the whole thing became completely out of balance - when the rights of offenders started to receive more attention than the rights of everyone else to be kept safe*

Even before the right in the U.K. to challenge legislation on the grounds of human rights, this type of offence would not have received a full tariff life sentence.

The rights of offenders to not receive more weight than the right of society to be kept safe. There are numerous objectives in the sentencing process and all are carefully weighed (rights of offenders per se do not actually feature).

Bananapop I expect knowing they had been statistically so unlucky was a great comfort to the victims of the 0.2. The ones who were still alive that is.

I'm sure the probation service has every intention of putting in place the measures you describe in your earlier post but as I said we know they are hugely underfunded, short of staff and with massive workloads. It clearly isn't working and until it is working then parole boards should be given greater flexibility to refuse early releases for violent and abusive offenders.

In this case however, I think the argument about whether the probation service can effectively supervise him is beside the point. I don't think he should be released, I know the system and guidelines allow it, but if that had been my grandmother, or Aunty , or sister I would not feel that seven years incarceration was sufficient payback for her suffering. It's not revenge, it's justice.

And having a serious drug problem does not give anyone a reason or an excuse to rape, assault, imprison anyone, let alone a 66 year old woman.

ludothedog

Prisons need to be for the most dangerous

I think you have just talked yourself out of an argument in this case.

How more dangerous do you need a violent rapist to be?

Sorry, meant to do italics not crossing out!

prisons need to be for the most dangerous

@viques

First of all, a 99.8% success rate clearly shows the system is, in fact, working. It is ludicrous to suggest otherwise.

Secondly, you are reading rather a lot into my post if you think that my mentioning his drug history is an excuse.

And if you've also read my post and the history of the case, you'll see he's not being released early...

It is disgusting he has been freed so quickly. Women are simply not valued enough. No doubt he said all the right obvious things to the parole board. In the US he would not be out not under any president regardless of party.

Ffs someone that can do that once is never safe in society. Nor does he deserve to lead a normal life in society. Totally agree with you OP.

Typical parole board bashing thread

There is just no need for the sarcasm in the first line of your reply. If you really want to apportion blame, perhaps you could start by looking at the perpetrator of any new offence rather than any one of the several agencies that are involved with Offender Management.

As for Parole Boards, they can make any decision they deem fit. I don’t always agree with them, and the choices are rarely popular, but the vast majority of PB releases do not go on to commit serious further offences. That’s a fact. I understand you don’t agree with the release of this man. That’s fine, and your prerogative. I also need to highlight to you that the criteria for PB release is NOT that they are “no longer a danger to the public”. It’s actually “whether it is necessary for the protection of the public that the prisoner remain confined”. Furthermore, it’s obvious that nobody wants to consider that a relative of theirs could be the victim of a heinous crime.

If you feel that strongly about it, why don’t you write to your MP, or take some other constructive action rather than criticise those that are actually trying to actively participate in managing this man when he is released? I am not being inflammatory, I am genuinely interested. Probation is far from perfect, but doesn’t operate in a vacuum either.

@Lockheart what a relief to see a degree of balance and critical thinking being applied!

My neighbour did 6 years for manslaughter.. 6 months before his release - xmss time - he was on day release at a busy shopping centre.. Buying gifts for his estranged dc..
His victim's family still weren't even celebrating Xmas..
No justice imo..

Here here. It's the total disinterest in the details some posters have which is frustrating.

@BananaPop2020 these threads always go the same way.

It's staggering how tenuous a grasp most people have of how the law operates in their own county.

Most people prefer to get angry over a tabloid soundbite rather than to step back and apply critical thinking.

It is my personal opinion that he shouldn't have been released, but my personal opinion means the sum total of fuck all as far as the parole board is concerned, and rightly so.

@Floatyboat. Completely agree. I am all for a debate on this type of thing, and actually think it’s critical that we do speak about it as it impacts everyone. However, it’s infuriating when people insist on ignoring any FACTS that don’t support their argument.