Human bloody rights and convicted murderers

[shinyhappytonks]

Makes me so mad

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6955071.stm

and since when does 'a life sentence' mean you get out when you are 26

11 paltry years for taking someones life, and altering an entire family

Here's some statistics for violent crime
www.crimestatistics.org.uk/output/Page63.asp
Went up in the 90's, now down to near early 80s levels
And that's number of offences, so if the population has increased, I guess violent crime is actually less common

Oh My God, Peachy!! Congratulations,,,,, off to send you a soppy email.

Of course parole boards can get it wrong. But after more recent events things have changed a lot the way things are done, as they have also done in recate boards, sentence plan boards and is determining deportation. Things are much tighter and more people are involved in the process, so that more people have to agree before parole, etc. is granted.

Of course it's not a simple solution, Hula! Never said it was.

But nor is racking up a body count by people who honestly should never have been given the option of parole because they have proven - over and over - that they are incapable of living in society without seriously offending.

We're not talking about teenagers here, we're talking about 40-to-50 something people with records of increasingly violent offenses a mile long.

What's wrong with putting society ahead of their 'hope' in some cases, when they're descimiated the hope of so many lives and seem to be bent on continuing to do so when released into society?

So if they are 40 years old the judge needs to set a higher minimum tarrif - 50 years for example. Not sure what the limits currently are, if any, as I don't deal with sentencing stuff.

What do you do Hula? Very nosey, sorry.

We would have far more probelms within prisons to start with is there was life without parole. There would be more attempts at escapes, more drugs, more riots, more violence - there would be need reason for these people to conform.

ThursdayNext - I am an advice and guidance worker, working in a prison with adult and YO prisoners. I deal with 17 years + and the offences vary greatly from Cat C stuff to Cat A/Lifer stuff. At the end of the year the prison is changing its cat status so will have more serious crimes stuff and less of the lower cat crimes.

I'm sure he is very sorry for what he is done. I hope he can have some semblence of a life when he is let out, whenever that may be. But why do we have to bend over backwards to ensure his happiness?

I know this is a different topic but it's like the thing about not being allowed to deport convicted murderers to countries we know have committed human rights abuses on prisoners. One convicted terrorist was recently not sent back to (I think) Lebanon for the reason that there was evidence that some Lebanese prisoners get mistreated. Not all. Some. And no suggestion that this man would have been a particular target. I recall the case because Lebanon is not an obviously heinous country to be asked to return to - it's not Afghanistan under the Taleban or anything.

What I don't understand is that we don't bend over backwards to try to protect the completely innocent people who are in, say, the Lebanon and who are being mistreated. But if someone manages to come to this country (and in this case it was in dodgy circumstances) and commits a horrific crime in this country, we then decide it is beholden on us to protect this person for the rest of time. So the wrongdoer gets to stay here and the innocent Lebanese can continue to be mistreated but at least can rejoice in the knowledge that convicted terrorists are being looked after.

I'm not arguing for mistreatment of convicts, of course. Just that our priorities seem completely screwy.

I did look up the stats. I couldn't find any for 1983.

But I do know that the sort of crime I am talking about ie; knife, gun etc. has increased since 1983. I just picked this at random as I would have been 14.

As everyone is asked to report a verbal abuse today as an assault they do not give exact figures, well I couldn't find them. Many of my family are police officers and they, if they were on here would tell you that the whole caboodle is increasing.

Some of these people still manage to get out, and they still manage to offend, even at advanced ages.

Not to mention those who are paroled and then go on the lam, like Tobin.

He had only committed the double rape in 1993. He was already in his late 40s then.

He had a record dating back to 1965, all attempts to 'reform' him hadn't worked, obviously.

When does government finally begin to recognise that there should be no chance an offender like this can be released into society or continue to take chances the system will break down - because it does at some point - and the offender will be lose to do this to someone else?

They wont Epis, it's against his human rights.

Then there needs to be some reform of the prison system here, IMO, if that's the case, Hula.

Because it shouldn't be just about them and reform and hope for them.

It's supposed to be a deterrent to crime as well and that means punishment on one level or another - such as loss of freedom for good.

Hula - how interesting.
Does it seem to you that sentencing is generally fair, or is it random and loopy?

I guess so, UCM, never mind that Miss Kluk's human rights wound up buried beneath a church floor and a 14-year-old girl's wound up in a needle full of junk.

UCM, the stats I linked to are for violent crime 1981 - 2006
They exclude homicide, you'll have to track down your own stats for that
Should take you all of 5 mins and may give you a slightly more accurate picture than hearsay

I worked first for an assistanct PA and then for a judge in my past, both in the state criminal courts.

Twas very interesting . . .

[Mahoosive thread hijack]

Hulababy - am very seioursly considering applying for probation service come the next round of recruitment. Am very keen. Could you point me in right direction of anything I can read/do in meantime?

Could I even contact you??

Very sorry for hijack. Knew this one would be contentious, tho interesting.

Think the widows statement very moving.

The punishment is loss of freedom and loss of the right to move freely and without question. The rehabilitation has got to be at least as important as this,

However as I said pefore I personally think prison should be tougher. There should be less rights and those they do have - TV, radio, games consoles, socialisation time, etc. - should be earned and I mean earned, not like the current system has it. No prisoner should be allowed to be idle in their cell. They should all be occupied in edcuation or work activities. This should be compulsary. They should all be made to comply with sentence plan targets and rehabilitation programmes. Failure to do so should mean loss of earned privledges, and consistent refusal should be immediate knock back of parole/tagging and even leading to additional days for misbehaviour/failure to follow an order.

There are plenty that could still be done within the prison service, but it won't happen as it costs money. And people don't like to think of their hard earned taxes being spent on prisoners.

ThursdayNext - Yes, I find my job really interesting and definitwely enjoy it more than my last job as a secondary school teacher. Re sentences, there can be variances, but TBH it is hard to judge just loooking at offence and sentence given. You need the full story of what happened, why and any mitigating reasons, plus any other background stuff. But yes, there are some sentences you think are too harsh and other you think are too soft.

niceglasses - yes you can CAT me or email on claire(dot)king13(at)btinternet(dot)com. Depends on what you are thinking of doing and in what capacity. There are a few good courses out there. My course I am currently doing is compulsary as of this year for anyone in an advice and guidance role. Also might be worth contacting your probation office to do some work experience/shadowing, and maybsome youth offending teams too.

Yes, Hula, I totally agree with you on that. I have known a few bods in prison and they seem pretty happy to me, especially with the drugs and in one open prison, the brandy.

As I say I am not talking from the Daily Mail side of things, just people whom I knew when I was younger and people whom I know now sort of thing.

Maybe I have just had a very colourful life and known lots of victims and perpetrators.

Drugs are big problem in all priosons. It still makes me that they have drug free wings on houseblocks. Surely they should all be drug free??? But from what i read I know a lot of stuff is being worked on in this area to try and minimise it. But it you made drugs awareness programmes, and drug intervention programmes, compulsary then that might help a bit too. As well as more loss of privledges for those foud with positive drug test results.

Hula, thanks. I know it was too simplistic a question, was just interested to know with your professional experience if you thought the whole system was crazy.

An aside, didn't the Police recently release some figures that didn't make happy reading. I certainly didn't see anything on here...

God, I remember leaving a bottle of Whiskey in a bush in my younger days for someone at an open prison and embarrassment