PC Harper killers sentenced

[ChazsBrilliantAttitude]

16 year and 13 year sentences.

I doubt they would have got much more if the murder charge had been successful.

I am glad to see the judge wasn’t convinced by their arguments.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-46544144

@thedancingbear amazing how some people think they can decide the verdict better than the jury who’ve actually heard all the evidence presented to them

I would certainly prefer that any teenager with learning difficulties who commited the kind of crime they were convicted of, be given the maximum possible sentence, yes.

The judge was clear in his sentencing remarks that there has to be a distinction between the sentencing for murder and manslaughter. If they get what is effectively a murder sentence what do you sentence someone of the same age who does get convicted of murder?

I would certainly prefer that any teenager with learning difficulties who commited the kind of crime they were convicted of, be given the maximum possible sentence, yes.

Okay, just so we're clear, you're happy with a judicial system that doesn't take into account things like the offender's age, and whether they have learning difficulties?

If so, that's fine, but I'm fucking glad that I don't live somewhere that uncivilised.

'They weren't convicted of murder because the jury decided that the case wasn't made out beyond reasonable doubt. Do you know better than the jury, despite having not sat through all the evidence?'

Yes yes we know they weren't convicted of murder because the jury decided to believe their story that they 'didn't know' despite their mile long drive when it would have been obvious.

'They weren't given maximum manslaughter sentences because they were teenagers with learning difficulties. Would you prefer a judicial system that doesn't take these kinds of things into account?'

It would have to be assessed on a case by case basis. So, say a 13 or 15yr old with significant cognitive impairment of course it would be relevant, however in older teens if those learning difficulties are minor then no I don't think it should be taken into account.

It would have to be assessed on a case by case basis. So, say a 13 or 15yr old with significant cognitive impairment of course it would be relevant, however in older teens if those learning difficulties are minor then no I don't think it should be taken into account.

This is fair enough. What do you know about the extent of their cognitive impairment? We're all ears.

the jury decided to believe their story that they 'didn't know' despite their mile long drive when it would have been obvious.

So you know better than the jury, then, despite having not sat through the trial. Thanks for clarifying.

@thedancingbear I would never read the 'mail.

However, i do believe that bad deeds need to be punished and as far as i can see, 10 years inside and released around 28yo is not "losing your best years" nor is it a deterrent.

It is well documented that UK prisons are not the best at rehab.

What you are doing is forgetting about the victim and concentrating on the welfare of the criminals.

What you are doing is forgetting about the victim and concentrating on the welfare of the criminals.

You want revenge not justice, then. Thanks for proving my point.

@thedancingbear

The judge did not seem to believe them either otherwise he would not have made his comment about murder .

Plus they may have had some learning difficulties but they were all capable of conducting a life of crime to earn money and knowing right from wrong . Plus the driver had threatened to ram a police officer before.

I think the sentences should be longer and their ages should not be taken into account . If you go out with weapons intending to rob and terrify members of the public you deserve everything you get .

IMO of course .

@thedancingbear

Personally I think it’s “uncivilised “ to purposely prevent the police investigation in the first place, get rid of evidence, and laugh in front of the family and the press about the case .

But that’s just me.

I feel so sorry for PC Harpers family and his poor poor wife.

A question for the legal experts here: when sentencing can a judge not take into account previous criminal behaviour or behaviour in the courtroom?

I think what gets me most is the laughing and utter contempt this trio showed in the trial. Doesn't seem to have bothered them at all. I reckon that's were a lot of peoples outrage comes from (that and their appalling crime). Most ordinary people would be at the very least subdued or contrite even if they weren't actually sorry, these three were not which made a mockery of the whole thing.

'This is fair enough. What do you know about the extent of their cognitive impairment? We're all ears.'

Well, I don't know their diagnosis I bet that's confidential, I was speaking generally. You asked if age and learning difficulties shouldn't be taken into account while 'being fucking glad you don't live somewhere uncivilised'. I suggested it depends.

For example dyslexia is a learning difficulty however it does not impact on the offenders ability to assess a situation and know that thay are causing someone's death. Whereas a severe learning difficultiy would. Do you follow, is that clearer for you?

I know one of them is illiterate, I wonder if that is his learning difficulty.

The old adage “Hard cases make bad law” applies here. You can’t change the rules that apply across all cases because of one particularly harrowing one. This case is awful but the guidance on the age of the offender and the consideration of any learning difficulties have to be applied consistently across all cases.

The judge stated
“ You also suffer from learning difficulties which make you more likely to follow the lead of someone who is more capable than you are”
That suggests more than illiteracy.

There's no point trying to have a discussion with some of the people on here.

Here you go:

www.ebay.co.uk/b/Gardening-Hay-Pitchforks/122906/bn_75394466

Have fun guys. See you later.

'This case is awful but the guidance on the age of the offender and the consideration of any learning difficulties have to be applied consistently across all cases.'

I think we have some of the jurors on this thread. Surely individual cases should be assessed erm, individually. The extent of any difficulties matters.

'Personally I think it’s “uncivilised “ to purposely prevent the police investigation in the first place, get rid of evidence, and laugh in front of the family and the press about the case .'

Indeed.

'There's no point trying to have a discussion with some of the people on here.'

Or, there's no point trying to convince most intelligent people they should have been convicted of murder. See ya, don't let the door hit you on the way out!

I think you understand full well what I mean - and I've outlined that I prefer the NZ version of the law.
We are far too slow to reform in this country in my view.

I'm sorry, I really don't understand what you mean, @Hingeandbracket. You said "The point I ma making is that after every case like this the legal apparatchiks set forth with a sea of excuses about why they can't do a better job". If your concern is that the law isn't being reformed quickly enough, that is the fault of law makers, not those who have to work with what the law actually is, rather than what it should be. You still haven't said what it is you expect the judge in this case to have done differently.

None will serve more than 10 years, probably less, so all free in their mid 20s, to continue their worthless lives.

As has been pointed out, one at least can't even begin to be considered for parole till 10.5 years have elapsed. I strongly suspect that none of these individuals will get parole easily unless they undergo pretty massive reform whilst inside.

People dismiss 10 years in prison as if it's a fleabite. Just think about all you have done in the last 10 years, or during your 20s - is it really that trivial? Would you really regard it as that easy to sacrifice all of that and instead spend 10 years sharing a small cell with a couple of thugs and a toilet?

People dismiss 10 years in prison as if it's a fleabite. Just think about all you have done in the last 10 years, or during your 20s - is it really that trivial? Would you really regard it as that easy to sacrifice all of that and instead spend 10 years sharing a small cell with a couple of thugs and a toilet?

No point, Pobblebonk. You're now sticking up for the offenders and forgetting the victims. We're literally as bad as they are.

There will always be people within a society who want every single criminal executed/pelted in the stocks/locked up and the key thrown away. It's an unfortunate aspect of human nature that no doubt goes back to prehistory, and this thread has demonstrated its a force that cannot be engaged with or argued against.

@thedancingbear, incredible isn’t it? Clearly there’s at least one poster here who honestly thinks they know better than the jury (despite not having sat through the trial and heard the evidence) and Knows more about the cognitive abilities of the defendant than the judge (despite not having read the Numerous psychological reports That the judge will have had)
Dear god.

I also wonder whether the same poster has been campaigning for changes to legislation sentencing guidelines over recent years? Because that is where the issue lies. Not with the people who are following the guidelines. But hey, why not bash innocent people doing jury service? It doesn’t take as many brain cells as actually reading up the relevant information and campaigning for change when you disagree with something.

I think we have some of the jurors on this thread. Surely individual cases should be assessed erm, individually. The extent of any difficulties matters

Sentencing guidelines are a matter for the judge and yes, judges have to apply the consistently. It is not up to an individual judge to ignore them in emotive cases. Judges should be producing similar sentences on similar cases (not identical as each case is considered on its merits but not wildly different either.)

But hey, why not bash innocent people doing jury service?

Quite. The juror-bashing on here is fucking appalling. I sincerely hope that none of the posters responsible ever have to sit on a jury in a case as harrowing as this. A relative of mine was called up to sit on the case of a serial paedophile and it completely fucked his mental health.

@thedancingbear Yes, a friend's dad was on the jury for the killers of James Bulger. I do know it really haunted him for years afterwards.

The juror bashing is fucking disgusting. So ignorant. Presumably for some people it’s too much effort to get themselves informed about legislation, sentencing and the parameters in which it operates. It’s far easier to froth about the people who had no choice about getting picked for Jury service. Perhaps it makes them feel better too, because if they bang on Daily mail style about stringing people up, it must show they really care