Tracie Andrews released from jail after serving 14 years for killing Lee Harvey

[rainbowtoenails]

I cant do a link to the news reports on this from my phone but I'm sure someone else can do that.

I saw Lee's parents on This Morning today. It is very sad that they have suffered the awful loss of their son and I can see why they feel let down by a justice system where life does not mean life.

But, looking at this case with a feminist gaze I cant help but make comparisons with other intimate partner killings. Mostly committed by men, these other cases Ive heard of rarely end up with a sentence of as long as 14 years. It reminds me of what I read ages ago in Helena Kennedy's 'Eve was Framed' that the justice system is harder on women than men for the same crimes. Im not saying that TA should have been let out sooner but that people of both genders who commit these crimes should be given equally long sentences.

Do you own the book SGM? Perhaps you could quote the relevant section? I found a very limited search function for the book, but I can't find anything about longer sentences for women. You did say that there were Home Office reports on the matter, which should be online and thus Googleable.

Interestingly, all the research actually seems to point to the exact opposite: women recieve greater leniency. For example:

www.universitydissertations.com/dissertations/Social-Policy/Female-Offenders.php

It really is amazing how upset people get when challenged on things - even when they're completely wrong!

I would be genuinely interested in seeing the home office statistics. I have googled repeatedly (and like to think I have pretty good research skills) but cannot find anything that backs up the assertions i) that more woman get cusodial sentences for first offences and ii) longer sentences for comparable crimes.

That's because they don't TQOD!

Jenny, why have you only posted on the Feminist section, why not the rest of Mumsnet?

Have you seen the topic list Crackfox?

Babies
Beauty
Feminism
Schools
Products

Which is the odd one out would you say? Ok, so there are the Politics and In The News sections, but these are hidden away in Other Stuff and there are, frankly, better discussion boards for these... This section is the only one that routinely covers societal issues. It is also full of so much UTTER TWADDLE that I get dragged in. This thread is a case in point: lots of people sagely nodding their heads at the injustice of longer sentences for women - and meanwhile in the real world there is no such phenomena. Have you read the exchange above?

Furthermore - the best way to explore the issues of the day is to talk to people you don't agree with. Again - as this section proves - talking with people who are apt to agree with everything you say leads to the general and lazy acceptance of half-truths when they conveniently can be twisted to suit an ideology. As evidence for this I'd cite 75% of any post that includes the word patriarchy.

I have no doubt that most 'feminist' MN posters who read this will disagree... but they would, wouldn't they? And that's the point.

Babies
Beauty
Feminism
Schools
Products

You do know that this is Mumsnet so those topics were probably going to be popular. Anyway, you are not discussing you are pretty much mocking everyone. Why? Most people have grown pout of that kind of debating style when they finish 6th form.

"You do know that this is Mumsnet so those topics were probably going to be popular" - yes, I didn't say I had an issuse with that or wondered why it was did I? I simply answered your question

"......most people have grown pout of that kind of debating style when they finish 6th form." Oh, you're being patronising and insulting! What an earth-shattering moment... I give an alternative veiw and so, of course, I'm an immature troll. This is the QED and thank you for providing it. What part of supplying academic references that disprove this thread is just plain mockery exactly?

Re-read our few posts here and then tell me which one of us is discussing the issue and which one is indulging in mockery and 'sixth-form' debating style?

You are jenny.

Have you actually been to bed yet Jenny as you have posted all night - exclusively on the Feminist section. Wow, those nasty feminist really get on your nerves, don't they?

With regards to Tracie Andrews she should have served a longer sentence. However, I finsdit interesting that she has been in all the newspapers.

Yes it is, no it isn't, yes it is, no it isn't....

Sorry, but isn't simply saying 'you are' rather a self defeating argument in this case?

Basically, I called SGM on something they said and there's no evidence to back it up. I then produced evidence of my own that actually suggested that the opposite is true. Rather than enter into this, there are now two of you posting nothing more than derisory attacks on me personally. You are simply proving my point. Do you not see that? No, of course not. Hilarious.

Not interested in debating with you jenny tbh.

Is trolling allowed on MN then?

She has been in all the papers because of the notoriety of her case at the time - the fact that she provoked a manhunt for a non-existent 'road rage' murderer; the fact that she appeared weeping on national TV pleading for the murderer of her partner - herself, in fact - to give 'himself' up.

Ian Huntley would likewise be in all the papers were he to be released; Jon Venables and Robert Thompson were; John Leslie was in all the papers before he was formally accused of anything. As I said, I think this was a very poor case for the OP to cite since I think the media interest has very little to do with the fact that she is a woman.

Interested enough to post in the first place though! Didn't we just discuss the merits of posting random mocking statements and failure to actually discuss the issue. THAT'S WHAT YOU JUST DID!!!!! Is any of this getting through at all?

One word for you both: hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.

Off to work, it's been fun.

Interesting thread.

I think one of the reasons this story was more newsworthy than other 'partner killings' was the availability of footage of tearful TA pleading for help in solving the murder.
Cases where the person later found to be the perpetrator make a tearful plea for help in front of the cameras are often high profile.

I agree with Jenny.
Unless I see statistics relating to the gender imbalance in sentencing I fail to see how this is a feminist issue, and I have spent 20 minutes googling the subject to no avail.
Asking for evidence to back up claims is not 6th form debating style
It seems that you are unable to provide it.

As for this
'i remember this case at the time of trial and always felt she had a very hard time of it.
something still doesn't sit right with me about it all.'

You felt she had a hard time?
She stabbed a man on the back, wasted police time and money, and has shown no remorse throughout her sentence.
That is why she has served every day of her 14 year sentence, unlike most other violent criminals.

Ahh so you are here to "get through to us"! Riiiight!

Having sympathy for a convicted killer and suggesting that Women get heavier sentences is ridiculous on both counts.

The Tracie Andrews case was unusual in many ways. Her solicitor arranged a huge press conference where she tearfully explained the "road rage attack"
and appealed for witnesses - another aggravating factor. The case also go a lot of press coverage as her solicitor was under investigation for fraud at the time and eventually got 7 years in prison, so all eyes were on him and his practice in any event.

jenny, are you serious?!

You've just suggested a book, peer reviewed, isn't worth reading because it doesn't support your argument and you've linked to a university dissertation?

I'm sorry to be rude (though not too sorry and I'm gobsmacked at how rude you're being to SGM), but do you not understand what you are doing at all? You seriously think you can ignore a book that's been published and peer reviewed just because you don't want to believe it?

WHY?

"37% of women entering prison under sentence
serve sentences of up to and including three
months, compared to 29% of men.

Women serve shorter prison sentences than
men and for less serious offences. In 2009 62%
of women entering custody served sentences
of six months or less, compared with 52% of
men.166 Theft and handling was by far the most
common offence, accounting for 34% of sentenced
receptions.

16% of women serving sentences of twelve
months or under have no previous convictions.

And most shocking to me:

"51% of women leaving prison are reconvicted
within one year ? for those serving sentences
of less than 12 months this increases to 62%.
For those women who have served more than 10
previous custodial sentences the reoffending rate
rises to 88%.247" This is higher than the average for men.

Lots and lots of facts and figures here including a table on page 15 which shows the proportion of women in prison for different types of crime.

Her case is definitely more notorious than the one linked upthread man named something Dyson?

Same set up, he pretended someone else did it too.

He also got a long sentence, but who remembers his name?

52% of women surveyed said that they had used
heroin, crack, or cocaine powder in the four
weeks prior to custody, compared to 40% of men.
However, practitioners report that women may hide
or underplay substance misuse through fear of losing
their children.

Statistics can show us the reasons why Women go to prison, but the problem is deciphering TOO MANY statistics.

Drugs are playing a part and we have to get on top of that.