Rishi Sunak and Lucy Lenny Case

[BackAgainstWall]

Why on earth didn’t Rishi Sunak rush to change the law to make it mandatory for offenders to appear in court at sentencing.

One would assume he has known about the Lucy Letby case for months, if not years. As usual with this government, the horse has already bolted.

Why doesn’t he want a statutory inquiry into the Lucy Letby case, where witnesses are legally compelled to present evidence?

Why would he want to rush it and in my opinion miss facts/gloss over such harrowing events?

It’s a complete insult to those poor parents and consultants.

Not sure many murderers killed lots of babies though, does put her in a very different category.

Exactly. Myra Hindley survived a very long time in jail.

Myra Hindley and Rose West were just as bad. They didn't kill babies, but multiple children in horrific ways. And both survived/surviving in prison.

Beverly Allitt has been incarcerated for 30 years.

That's true. Will she be in solitary confinement all her sentence? There's a tiny bit of me wondering what her first morning of the rest of her life is like? Is she revelling in the notoriety or full of regret? It's just so baffling

I'm not going to get into top murderer trumps. There are people just as evil as LL in prison who have survived.

I think it's a real shame they didn't give the babies proper pseudonyms. Maybe then we could focus on who actually matters

well it would contravene her human rights.
We don't have to behave like barbarians, even to serial murderers of babies.

The last woman to receive a whole life order was Joanne Dennehy.

Her behaviour in the dock was seen as a last chance to show her contempt for all involved.

"Dennehy laughed in the dock as the judge said she was "a cruel, calculating, selfish and manipulative serial killer". Spencer said she had a "sadistic lust" for blood."

"Dennehy, wearing a pink sleeveless T-shirt, smiled and chatted during the proceedings."

"As graphic and bizarre details of her acts were detailed by the judge, Dennehy appeared to laugh and smile. The court heard that she had told a psychiatrist she killed to see if she was as "cold as I feel" and that spilling blood became "more-ish".

This is the problem - there is no suggestion Letby would have behaved in such a way but there is an element of 'be careful what you wish for' here.

Sorry I wasn't meaning to.

I wish they'd stop putting pictures of her everywhere too.

The focus at sentencing should be on the victims and their families. Maybe the offender could be made to appear by video link (and could therefore be turned off/muted if they behave disrepectfully), but forcibly dragging them in risks turning it into a horrible circus which would be even more damaging and traumatising for the victims.

I get the need for revenge, but this change wouldn't deliver the satisfaction that people think. Imagine potentially having to see your baby's murderer sit in the dock laughing and joking while impact statements are read out, or shouting abuse at you. It wouldn't help anyone.

Are you a member of the Taliban, perchance? Because the UK dragging people into court bound and gagged will really play well in Afghanistan, Russia, Iran, Yemen, Syria, China, North Korea.....

The minute we start stripping people of their human rights, regardless of who they are or what they have done, then none of us have human rights, because they can be stripped on the whim of a government. I very much doubt that she is not guilty, but I am not prepared for there to be the slightest chance that she is stripped of her right to speak out her belief that she is not guilty, then discover 20 years from now that the bound and gagged person refused speech in court was telling the truth. Of course, the vigilante mob will say that's impossible, but that's what was said about every single miscarriage of justice, because at the time of conviction they were all guilty.

The measure of humanity is not in what other people do, but in what we ourselves do.

Too many people think removing human rights only applies to other people. They don't realise that once you start excluding some people anyone can be excluded and that includes them. It's very much an all or nothing scenario.

Absolutely

Being in court to hear the victim statements and the sentence should be part of the process. It should not be a choice yes or no on the part of the accused. Should being arrested be stopped? Obviously not. Should having bail refused he stopped? Of course not. These are part of the process. Being in court during the final moments should be part of the process too.

Do you think it helps the victim's families when the offender sits there laughing and showing contempt for them while being sentenced?

Well said.

I find it weird that people think she will be beaten up or ostracised in prison and 'won't survive'.

I think she will do quite well in prison.

She's well educated and presentable. She's clearly manipulative and was able to form strong friendships at work and in her personal life. She will find her place.

Her parents will be there for her. A lot of people in prison have absolutely nobody on the outside.

Surely it is possible to think up ways to protect the victims. These people should be asked what they want. I would say, just based on my opinion, that there could be a soundproof place for the accused to sit. The sound could be streamed into this place so that the accused could hear/hear an interpreter or see a sign language person or whatever was needed. A curtain could be pulled across to protect the victims at the victims request. If the victim did not want to be in the same room then the accused could be moved but still able to follow the process.

I'm not sure what people think it would achieve. Do people really think cold blooded serial killers are going to be upset by witness statements etc? If she had any empathy, she wouldn't have committed the crimes in the first place.

The process is that people don't have to go to court though. They can be found guilty and sentenced without being present.

The purpose of victim statements isn't to shame the defendant or make them think about what they've done. Victim statements are addressed to the judge and are to show to him/her what impact the crime has had on the victims so that he/she can use them when deliberating over the sentence. I don't know where people have gotten the idea that they're the victims opportunity to speak directly to the accused when that's not what they're for.

So again, what would be the purpose of forcibly dragging a defendant into court other than giving the remotely-spectating mob their opportunity to cackle and jeer?

On the R4 Today programme (confusingly, yesterday) the former judge discussing this said that she would be brought to court, as the prison service must 'present the prisoner' to court. But, after that, the prisoner can't be compelled to get into the dock.
So, they are there.
The victim impact statements are for the judge , to maybe affect sentencing (prob. did not make a difference here, though).
And, sadly, I don't think it's going to make it any easier for the families whether she's there or not. But I understand the desire to listen to the families and give them want they want.
Imagine she broke down in tears and said sorry rather than was abusive, for example. Would it make it more forgivable? Would that make you more accepting about your newborn baby being murdered? I wouldn't have thought so.

IMHO that should change. Being present for the sentence should be part of the process.

Why? It doesn't change the sentence and the defendant gets told of it regardless so there is literally no purpose to them being there. Why do you need the pantomime of them physically being in the dock for it?

Why? What do you think it will achieve. She will still be told the sentence and have to serve it. She would just be sitting on a different place. If the suffering of the families meant anything to Letby she would have stopped after the first baby and none of us would be any the wiser about what she did. But she didn't so what difference will being in the courts actually make.