To Think This is Too Low a Sentance - 12 year olds knife killing

[LuckysDadsHat]

https://news.sky.com/story/two-boys-believed-to-be-uks-youngest-knife-murderers-detained-for-minimum-of-eight-years-and-six-months-13221221

8.5 years minimum is nothing when these children are still only 13. They could be out at the same age of the man they killed. Why are sentences getting so lenient? I know some will say they are just children, but they are not so naive to not know what they were doing, and after the murder one of them was on social media saying "I don't really care" about the murder. It's just horrific and we need to have higher mandatory sentencing for all knife crimes including just carrying a knife.

@JudgeJ it is perfectly possible to be full of concern and compassion for the young man and his family AS WELL as wanting two 13 year olds dealt with appropriately

Why is 8 years a "huge sentence for a 12 year old"? They will only be 20 when they are released. 8 years would be a huge sentence for an 82 year old as they are likely to die in prison. The younger the criminal, the sentence should be longer.

I am being serious. I don't see that releasing them early is working well, so yes. Until such time as rehabilitation is working and there are sufficient support services for ex-offenders, keep them locked up.

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/proven-reoffending-statistics-january-to-march-2022/proven-reoffending-statistics-january-to-march-2022#:~:text=5.2%20Sex,%25%20to%2024.4%25%20for%20females.

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/proven-reoffending-statistics-january-to-march-2022/proven-reoffending-statistics-january-to-march-2022#:~:text=5.2%20Sex,%25%20to%2024.4%25%20for%20females.

8 years

The violent crime rate is lower now than it was in 1960, I think people are just more aware of it now.

Nope crime has gone up massively since the early 20th century (I saw a graph that said 20 times but can't find it). https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/guides/z2cqrwx/revision/8
Murder rates increased as soon as the death penalty was abolished but looks lower than it should be because of advances in surgery saving many more knife crime victims. And "crimes" such as riding a bicycle without lights were regularly prosecuted up to the fifties making crime look higher.

Crime is higher now than it has ever been.

Did you actually bother to read the article or did you just read the headline?

@Daftasabroom I have read several books about crime and I know it is much higher now but it is really hard to find the data via a quick Google (and I wouldn't be surprised if that's intentional as would be uncomfortable for our leaders if the public knew how lawless the county is compared to the early 20th C). That article is very Mickley mouse but gives the general gist.

So how many men who were convicted of murder when they were boys between the ages of 10 and 14 commit another murder while released on license?

No stats I could see for juvenile murder because it's so rare, however:

Juvenile offenders given youth cautions or released from custody had differing proven reoffending rates, at 25.1% and 59.5% respectively.

So custodial sentences have more than double the reoffending rates of non custodial sentences. And you want more custodial sentences? If you're going post links make sure they support your claims.

The general gist would be that car crime was low in the early 20th c because there weren't many cars. Etc etc. Equally tech fraud is the fastest growing crime of recent years, knife crime is actually falling.

Stats are just that, stats

The prisons are full.... and in many cases, crumbling

I work in an old Victorian jail which is full of rats/pigeons/cockroaches. Appalling conditions. Building is listed so changes can only be minimal. It's freezing in winter and no ventilation in summer

We need investment into the prison service

Yes, I want longer custodial sentences. The dead remains dead and the killer remains jailed. Ultimately it comes down to what level of risk one is comfortable with, and I choose a lower risk level.

Murderers may not commit further murders after release or do so at a lower rate, but they are often involved in violence or other crimes before and after serving their sentences, so I'm happy for them to remain incarcerated.

Mostly because there's no strong evidence to suggest that harsher sentences reduce crime, particularly for the most serious offences.

There is however strong evidence to suggest that greater equality, including equality of income, sex and wealth, does.

Interesting that you reference London in the 1950s, well before rape in marriage became an offence or the domestic violence act. The 60s saw a spike in violent crime not because of sentences, but because of a mix of social and economic shifts and a huge change in policing.

So I'm not convinced women are less safe now in London than they were in the 1950s.

Exactly. I cannot believe this thread -
Just shows how utterly backwards our society is.
This is mumsnet where we recognise that a child age 13 does not have the capacity to independently manage the consequences of having a smart phone , or to consent to sex, etc.. Yet somehow they are as culpable as an adult when it comes to punishment within the justice system?

Can you read?

Custodial sentences for juveniles have 2.4x the reoffending rates of non custodial sentences. This is the opposite of what you want, it is more expensive and results in more crime.

A 13 year old should know that murder is wrong, on MN there is an appalling infantilising of young people, if they don't know that murder is wrong then their breeders or whoever is responsible for them should stand next to them in the dock and be punished along with them.

Can you?

Or are you so hard of understanding, you can't imagine that regardless of your badgering, I want something different to you?

Feel free to f*%k off now 👋🏾.

Would that include putting the communities, family services, funding bodies and the politicians who have cut funding to these in the dock also?

You want what you want regardless of whether it does what you want?

Actually, I do get that many people want to see short term punishment because it makes them feel better. I do get that for some people that emotional quick fix is really important. But equally you need to accept that if we act purely based on short term emotions rather than the longer term reality that reality may well not be what you hope it might be.

If nothing else this thread shows that there are many people whose values are based on short term emotional reactions as well as those whose values are based on a more philosophical approach.

Thought-terminating cliché.

Of course they “know that murder is wrong”. A 6 year old knows that- would you put them in jail for life too? Would you punish a kid the same as an adult for stealing? Kids know that’s wrong too. “Knowing something is wrong” doesn’t mean that children have the same capacity to control/ regulate their behaviour, to make decisions from moment to moment, to resist peer influence , or to understand the full consequences of their actions. That is the point.
This has nothing to do with infantilising children. A 13 year old is a child; not even close to having the same brain capacity as an adult.

What stopped you murdering when you were 13, thinking it was wrong or a cost/benefit analysis of the likely sentence?

If you're holding their parents responsible, is that for life, or up until a certain age? Either you're arguing children are fully responsible for their actions and should be treated as adults, or not. It can't, be both.