When will someone grow a pair and create a proper justice system?

[girlfriend44]

Ava Whites killer gets 13 years today for stabbing her to death in Liverpool last November.

The judge refused to name him as well.
We just keep hearing crappy sentences and decisions all the time?
All on the side of the offender?

Do you think anything will ever change? Why couldn't we hear the news he's been locked up for 35 years and he has been named?
Someone some balls needs to take charge. Countryside an embarrassment.

Incarceration isn't much of a life.

I think the op shows a total ignorance of the complexity of managing children who commit offences.

Ridiculously simplistic to think there are no mitigating factors when a child commits murder. Also ridiculously simplistic to think an endless life sentence serves any useful purpose before assuaging the outrage of a society which would rather solely blame that DC rather than examine how he came to a point of doing what he did.

13 years is an unusually long sentence for a child of that age.

There is a tendency for people to think sentences are too short. Often people who complain about this kind of thing don't really know what kinds of sentences are typical or what factors are considered in giving them.

When you dig down what you usually find is they want all these people locked up permanently. They don't have some baseline they think should be met.

Which, even if it were desirable, is totally impractical.

13 Years in prison is a long time in prison.

We need a better justice system for rape victims, less than 2% of reported rapes lead to a conviction, the CPS too often fall in favour of the rapist.

Not out of a whole lifetime 13 years isn't long.

She would have years left to live it it wasn't for him.

Would you be happy if your child was murdered and they got 13 years?

Of course criminals should be named. We need to know exactly who these people are and the date of their release. They could one day be walking among us.
Also how could any other victims come forward if nobody knew who it was? Its a well known fact that The Yorkshire Ripper had many more victims, and also that some.who survived gave a very good description. Unfortunately due to the utter ineptitude of West Yorkshire police, he was free to murder many more victims
And for the record, I and probably plenty more Mmers , would be able to name.several.of his victims

Three of the recent Justice Ministers have been Chris Grayling, Liz Truss and Dominic Raab. Which shows how little importance the so-called party of law and order place in actually having a proper justice system. All talk and little or no action.

Fund the police properly, fund the courts properly so no-one accused or their alleged victims have to wait months or years for justice.

I'm quite happy cases are judged and sentences set by impartial people who've heard all the evidence, rather than a braying mob.

Everyone in Liverpool knows who is he, the family had to be moved the night the news broke. The anonymity is to protect the siblings. Tbh, I'd say most people are more shocked by the sentence that Violet Youens killer got. People are supposed to serve half, but many serve even less. A three year sentence sounds ok, but a lot end up doing a year. I've seen some really concerning cases of DV get less than three years.

I'm m with you OP, a 13 year old local to me was stabbed to death and the 3 involved in his case got short sentences, the girl who planned and set it up only got 3/4 years, it's awful and we should have proper sentences and they should be named

Me too. When you read all the sentencing guidelines they seem very sensible to me. But then my preference is on the rehabilitation of offenders while they serve their punishment, because people who come out without skills and who have continued to be exploited through their time in prison are a much greater burden on society.

If I'm thinking of the correct case, didn't they name the perpetrators?

Alot of it is bad parenting and no discipline.

When a young teen commits a murder how can it not have anything to do with the parents?
The texts he sent to his mum that night say alot and the way he spoke to the police.

It's disgusting. The people working in the system always think they know better than the general public who pay their wages and who are at risk from the criminals when they are released. It's the wrong way round. They work for us. It isn't for them to tell them "we're right, you're wrong" and they do what the public wants, if they refuse, sack them, jail them for aiding, abetting, providing succour to criminals. The ONLY thing that matters in dealing with criminals is the rights of non-criminals to live a life unaffected by criminal activity. The rights of criminals should no concern whatsoever, they should forfeit these rights when they choose to break the law.

1- they also pay taxes ...
2- if you know better nothing is stopping you to go and study it then. Will be walk in a park!
3- public obviously shouldn't be near important decision based on voting records and.... Threads like this
4- the decision makers are of course also in public hence in same (often bigger actually) risk
5- this was the most stereotypical Sun reader post I have ever read with every cliche thrown in. Actually an impressive job. Only thing missing was moan about EU

And I say that as a victim of repeated crimes some by same offender. As much as I was fuming and would love to hang them by the balls in a chimney, there is no way I could deny them representative or right for rehabilitation.

The problem with criminals not having rights is that that's all well and good until it's you or someone you care about accused of a crime you didn't commit.

At that point the right to representation, a fair trial etc etc starts looking pretty important.

That's pretty unlikely to happen to me but that doesn't mean I don't think everyone deserves the right to good representation and a fair trial.

1- they also pay taxes ...
Not in any real sense. They are paid by the public purse and give a bit back. If they were just paid less and paid no tax it would be no different.
2- if you know better nothing is stopping you to go and study it then. Will be walk in a park!
I've no interest in studying it. The current system isn't working and cares far more about the rights of criminals than it does about the rights of law-abiders.
3- public obviously shouldn't be near important decision based on voting records and.... Threads like this
Based on the stories in this thread about various children being stabbed to death , I think they do. Because the police and justice system clearly don't give a shit until someone dies, and even then not much of a shit.
4- the decision makers are of course also in public hence in same (often bigger actually) risk
Rubbish. The decision makers live in nice areas and the police will race round if a judge or high ranking legal professional is threatened. Normal people have to wait days, if the police show up at all.
5- this was the most stereotypical Sun reader post I have ever read with every cliche thrown in. Actually an impressive job. Only thing missing was moan about EU haven't read the Sun for years, have maybe read it 5 times in my life. I am just sick of criminals being pandered to and regular people being murdered/raped/maimed/terrorised while "legal professionals" line their pockets and laugh about it.

They are not being pandered to. 🙄
If you want to change it, get in, start changing. The little thing of human rights might be an issue, but I am sure smart cookies here will figure it out

The NHS employs almost 2m people, all paid for by the public purse. Are none of them really tax payers? 😆

Until convicted they aren't criminals, they should have the right to a fair trial etc. But once they are convicted, they are criminals. Criminals should be dealt with in whatever way benefits the law-abider the most, and inconveniences the law-abider the least, the rights of criminals should not even be a consideration. Law-abiding citizens should not have to live in fear of crime. There should be a clear dividing line between law-abiders and criminals.

"The NHS employs almost 2m people, all paid for by the public purse. Are none of them really tax payers?"
Not really, no. They are tax recipients.

What's the difference between a public sector worker being paid £150,000 gross and paying £60,000 in income tax/NI and the same person just being paid £90,0000 and not paying having to pay any tax or NI? It would make no difference whatsoever.

’Would you be happy if your child was murdered and they got 13 years?’

Of course not. I would hate that person and want them to be locked away for ever and even that wouldn’t be enough. Nothing can be enough if someone has killed your child. That’s why we don’t let emotion drive sentencing.

There are clear guidelines that the judge has to work within to give a sentence. They don’t pluck a number out of their heads.

There are few countries with punishments some posters here would be happy with... The problem is these often go hand in hand with other stuff. Like.. oh. Lack og human rights

The justice system is designed to be fair and its arguably the fairest system in the world. That means that however unfair it may sound, no, the justice system shouldn't be 'better' for anyone than it is for anyone else, as fair, means just that, fair for all, including those accused of heneious crimes. Once you make it better for a certain group, you make it worse for others, and that's something I for one strongly disagree with. Does that mean it will bring justice in all cases, no. But the alternative is far worse!

Me too. When you read all the sentencing guidelines they seem very sensible to me. But then my preference is on the rehabilitation of offenders while they serve their punishment, because people who come out without skills and who have continued to be exploited through their time in prison are a much greater burden on society.

My preference would be rehabilitation but not for the most serious offences. Sadly, it doesn't seem to happen even for minor offenders. Ive been heartened to see a number of job adverts that mention their support of "ban the box" ( unlock.org.uk/project/ban-the-box/ ). SERCO is the most frequent recruiter I've seen mention it on job adverts. While I support rehabilitation of petty criminals, I also support much longer sentences for people who commit the most serious of crimes. I've been appalled by some of the lenient sentences and even with all of the facts before them, judges are restricted by sentencing guidelines regardless of their opinion. Angel Lynn is the girl left with lifelong brain damage after her boyfriend manhandled her into a van and she jumped out to escape. He got 7 1/2 years, eventually upped to 12 years after appeal. She'll be in her very early 30's and still unable to communicate when he gets out. Baby P's mother has already been released. He died in 2007 after 8 months of torture. Joseph McCann sexually assaulted several people ranging from a boy aged 11 to a 71 year old woman. He raped the 11year old boy and his 17 year old sister in front of each other until the sister jumped from a first floor window naked to get help. He got 30 years, increased to 40 years but do you really think a man who can do that is capable of rehabilitation at all? The men who murdered the 28 year old police officer Andrew Harpur, dragging him behind their car, were photographed laughing and posing for reporters at their trial. They received 13 and 16 years. There are way too many examples that show a complete lack of consequences for serious offenders.