Naming convicted killers - Brianna

[Noangelbuthavingfun]

...Ghey case. In favour of or against as it impacts their rehabilitation? I'm in favour of it - if you've committed a heinous crime you sign away all your rights to be protected in my opinion - what comes your way and being ousted is part of your lot.... I'm not talking about self defence type, rather premeditated and horribly evil crimes. But I think this should be a consistent theme and not just when some judges decide to....at the momentvits not consistent practice.
Aibu to think it's right to name and shame?

The mugshots are like passport photos though, they're not going to be flattering! The girl at least looks different in her instagram etc photos. Someone on her street apparently said they thought it must have been a mistake when she was arrested so she did come across as a normal teenage girl to others.

Come on. As if the parents didn't know who they were.

I don't believe you should even be let out and rehabilitated. The victim doesn't get the same and never will.

There might be underlying reasons- but it's no one else's job to make allowances for that in these types of pre-meditated, ultra-violent crimes. I think for all acts of behaviour that impacts on others, from shocking violence to bullying in school and beyond, no matter what reasons for causing harm to another, there needs to be strong consequences as well as any understanding and rehabilitation. People need to learnt that harming another is never, ever going to be excused or lessened in consequence because.of underlying problems. You face the consequences/ punishment AND get help for your own issues.

The girl sounds like she has a serious personality disorder. If she were an adult she would be looking at a whole life order. Very grim

In the sentencing coverage they are saying that in custody she made another "kill list" and added several members of staff in the unit she was in.

Yes. That's not autism or ADHD. It is someone with a propensity and enjoyment of violence. A sadist.

Why is the idea of naming purely about rehabilitation or not?

A lot of people murder for the fame, the notoriety, the killers have been granted their wish.

I worry that the same argument for not naming terrorists applies to child killers. There are enough deranged people out there who might actually like the idea of becoming household names. We should really avoid making these names into well known, celebrity type names.

I am very against ever naming child criminals. We have amongst the lowest age of criminal responsibility in the world and do a very poor job at rehabilitation - name and shame would only exacerbate that. It’s an absolutely shooting yourself in the foot as society to write off teenagers and very expensive in long term prison costs.

I’m fundamentally of the belief that a significant number of child criminals can be rehabilitated given the proper re parenting and environment, which should be in the context of highly resourced forsensic boarding schools with intensive psychological and multidisciplinary input.

Yes of course. I'm not sure that I would trust myself with the information, though. And anyway there is a big difference between families knowing and it being national press.

Not necessarily. The victim's family thought this would be a whole life order: Paranoid schizophrenic, 30, who kicked 54-year-old female custody officer to death is seen walking through town having been freed just two years after he was handed indefinite psychiatric hospital order

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13036939/paranoid-schizophrenic-female-custody-officer-death-free.html

I had deliberately avoided reading about this case for a long time, but moved by this thread I've just been on the BBC site to look through the reports (some parts I couldn't stomach). I wanted to try to take a sensible view. So having read the facts as reported by the BBC, I don't have an iota of sympathy whatsoever for the murderers or their families.

The victim's family on the other hand are utterly destroyed.

There was a young lad stabbed to death local.to me a couple of years ago he was 15 and his killers were a,similar age it was a senseless killing all to do with some stupid argument on line and then arranging to meet up.for a fight what the victim didn't know was that it was two against one and hey had knives
The judge remarked that the killers thought they were gangsters the main perpetrator even posted what he did on social media
What goes through these kids minds .

The horse already left the stable within hours of the murder, but that alone doesn't mean it's right to release their names.

The effects on family are likewise already occurring, so continuing to withold their names won't prevent this. However, that again does not justify releasing their names.

Likewise for the age consideration.

There are good arguments for and against and in the general case we need to be careful of falling into the trap of fetishising retributive suffering, especially for family members. I firmly believe that isn't who we should be striving to be as a society.

I don't think you are being unreasonable for finding this a concerning subject to consider in general let alone for this specific case. It sounds like a great deal of deliberation has precipitated this decision and I do support it, but I doubt much good will come from it overall.

Where people are unlikely to see the light of day I don’t really know what the benefit of naming any murderer is. Off the top of my head I can’t name any of the West’s victims, or Peter Sutcliffe’s, or John Wayne Gacey… If my relative had been murdered I would want their life and their loss to be the centre of the story. I would hate for the tabloids to be churning up the murderer’s past looking for juicy tidbits and photos they can use to sell papers.
Different if it’s crime where other victims come forward, but if it all it does is give the killer a celebrity status and bring pain for the innocent by standers of their lives then I don’t see the point.

Can 15 years olds be given whole life orders?

I think family members would want perpetrators to be publicly named. Public shame rather than anonymity after a crime like that.

I agree with this.

I definitely don't think they deserve anonymity, but yet what good does naming them do now really?

If anything it means their families will be targeted and they've done nothing wrong. Although I get people saying they've been named online anyway.

Of course you can spot when a device has downloaded software to access the dark Web addmitly they won't be able to see the content but it would raise enough concerns that its being used.

No. Life sentences are only given to adults (18 years and older).

@Dancerprancer19 these killers have 0 value and do not deserve rehabilitation! 15 is way old enough to know exactly what they were doing. They deserve nothing and are owed nothing by anyone. No excuses for these types of crimes. They carried out a frenzied pre-meditated attack. Anyone doing this has no place in society, ever.

An adult, maybe. But these killers are children. Yes, old enough to know right from wrong. But not in the depth of understanding of an adult.

And there's a problem with having prisons with a proportion of prisoners with no hope of release. We need to give virtually all prisoner some hope for protection of out prison officers. To release safely we need rehabilitation.It's not being soft on the offender, it's the practicality of keeping us and prison officers safe.

Well unfortunately for you they will get rehab

And will be released one day

Depends on their behaviour in custody, but rehab will be attempted

@MereDintofPandiculation

Thankyou for considering us who work in these environments! Rare you see it in threads like this

All in favour of naming killers no matter what their age.