Chazsbrilliantattutide thank you for your calm re-statement of facts about the trial and sentencing.
I agree with this
All my instincts are that the judge gave them the max he thought he could give without risking being overturned on appeal.
We may feel that the defendants should have got longer sentences but verdicts are for juries and sentencing for judges, not members of the public who do not know the law or all the facts.
This was an absolutely horrific crime and an appalling tragedy. But calling for very long sentences for young criminals on the basis of their youth is problematic, and those saying that sentences are a joke nowadays etc ought to read a bit more about sentences in the past. Nowadays we quite regularly see 30+ years - even 20-odd years ago when I worked in the criminal justice system this was very unusual. And life sentences are mandatory for murder. Whole life sentences are rare for good reasons.
I do agree with those criticising govt funding though - while ultimately those convicted are wholly responsible for the crime, underfunding in policing, social work, probation and the prison system ought to be addressed as a matter of urgency. Imposing long sentences after the fact is cold comfort to everyone.