The Andrew Harper Case

[Witchofzog]

My heart goes out to his wife, family, colleagues and friends today. I just find the details reported in the media today absolutely horrifying. Part of me thinks there is no need to report such terrible details and part of me thinks the world needs to know what these animals did so there is no shred of doubt what monsters they are. His poor loved ones having to know this

@MrsTerryPratchett You're clearly a very kind person to say this. There aren't many people who would share your viewpoint.

I think for some people, the loss of liberty doesn't feel sufficient. For someone who is the victim of a violent crime, or who loses a loved one to violent crime, they have to live with the consequences of that every day for the rest of their life. Some may have serious mental or physical issues resulting from the crime.

I think people absolutely know that when they talk about not having a good time inside, that they mean the perpetrator will be assaulted. I know that sounds barbaric, but some crimes are so horrific (like this one) that locking someone up for a few years (8 in the case of the driver) doesn't feel enough. Frankly, were I the family or friend of Mr Harper, I wouldn't care a jot if the killers behaved well whilst they were inside.

I find that difficult to say, as I try to treat other people how I'd like to be treated myself. I do take solace from the fact that when these people are released from prison, I would imagine that they will be watched very carefully indeed to identify any breaches of the terms of their licence to send them back to prison at super quick speed.

@14yearsago Thank you for sharing your story. I am so sorry to hear that this happened. It sounds like your relative was incredibly brave and I wish them a peaceful future.

Frankly, were I the family or friend of Mr Harper, I wouldn't care a jot if the killers behaved well whilst they were inside.

I completely understand that. And I understand that family want them punished as severely as possible. But the justice system has to operate.

I used to work with ex-offenders and we hated those who left prison without supervision. It was a nightmare. Can't be reintegrated, can't be effectively managed, if they struggled with prison they were going to be a nightmare outside. They couldn't be forced into programs. Couldn't be recalled if they were at risk of reoffending.

A lot depends on what we want the justice system to be for. Revenge, punishment, rehabilitation, treatment? Because you can't do all those things. I've been in many prisons including one where the offenders live in houses, there's beekeeping, a mediation circle, you can see seals, dolphins and whales from the grounds. They have a low recidivism rate. I've also been in horrible prisons with a high recidivism rate. It all depends what you want from custodial sentences.

@MrsTerryPratchett they are 18 and 19. If they behave they could be out in 8 years which means they would be 26 and 27. Still pretty young and young enough to still get married, have children etc

Even if they serve the full term they will still be released in their early 30’s, unless they have very short life expectancies they will not spend the majority of their lives in prison. I watched a programme on fraud the other day, a husband and wife were imprisoned for over 20 years each. Why are sentences for financial crimes so much more than for violent crimes, murder and rape? We might not have capital punishment, and that’s right, but we don’t place much value on victims lives either.

I meant the majority of their lives already lived. Sorry for the confusion.

@MrsTerryPratchett you make an excellent point that prison can't effectively punish and rehabilitate offenders and do them both well.

I would be interested to understand whether there was any difference between prisoners who attended the lovely jails you described and the awful ones. Did they have similar criminal records? Similar backgrounds? I'm just interested to understand if the treatment and opportunities afforded were partly responsible for the low recidivism rate, or whether the prisoners who went there were eg white collar, first time offenders or people who were otherwise unlikely to reoffend.

@MrsTerryPratchett

I meant the majority of their lives already lived. Sorry for the confusion.

Ahhh that makes sense!

14yearsago.
18! My God. Words fail me. 😟

[quote Glitterandunicorns]@MrsTerryPratchett you make an excellent point that prison can't effectively punish and rehabilitate offenders and do them both well.

I would be interested to understand whether there was any difference between prisoners who attended the lovely jails you described and the awful ones. Did they have similar criminal records? Similar backgrounds? I'm just interested to understand if the treatment and opportunities afforded were partly responsible for the low recidivism rate, or whether the prisoners who went there were eg white collar, first time offenders or people who were otherwise unlikely to reoffend. [/quote]
It was a federal prison with over half the men serving life sentences. So serious offenders. They get time there when they've behaved elsewhere so it's highly motivating.

However the worst behaviour tends to be in institutions with younger offenders on short sentences. They, frankly, are a bloody nightmare. I'd rather work with someone who has committed murder than car offences. From a behaviour management POV.

That's really interesting @MrsTerryPratchett.

Apparently their sentences are being reviewed.

Strange isn't it if you carry out an armed robbery on a bank you get longer than if you carry out an armed murder or rape.
Anyone would imagine that the state holds money of higher value than lives.

www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-berkshire-55331692

The scum won't have their sentences extended after all.

Strange isn't it if you carry out an armed robbery on a bank you get longer than if you carry out an armed murder or rape

Not true.

For a typical armed robbery on a bank the starting point for sentencing is 9 years. Murder carries a mandatory life sentence with a starting point of 15 years for the minimum term (assuming the offender is 18 or over - 12 years for younger offenders). The lowest starting point for rape is 5 years but that is only for the least serious offences. If weapons or violence are involved the starting point is 8-10 years. For the most serious cases the starting point is 15 years.

The scum won't have their sentences extended after all

I'm not surprised. The sentences were in line with the sentencing guidelines. The sentence for Long (the driver) was at the top of the range less the required deduction for pleading guilty. There was also a reduction due to his age which, according to the sentencing guidelines, is a mitigating factor. The other two got lower sentences in line with their lesser roles in the offence and their learning difficulties. The Attorney General was therefore arguing that the judge should have stepped outside the sentencing guidelines in this case. That was never likely to fly.

As the Court of Appeal said, the jury found the defendants not guilty of murder. The judge could, therefore, only sentence them for manslaughter.