Killers and rapists to be freed early starting in September

[IwantToRetire]

David Lammy, the Justice Secretary, is to implement legal changes that will see criminals accused of serious offences released early for the first time as part of Government efforts to prevent jails from running out of space.

They include prisoners convicted of manslaughter, rape, GBH and sex offences who will be eligible for release halfway through their sentences rather than serving the current tariff of two-thirds of their sentence.

For a criminal jailed for a total of 15 years for manslaughter or rape, it will mean they will be freed after 7.5 years rather than 10, provided they are assessed to have behaved well and have not committed any serious rule breaches while in prison.

Criminals convicted of burglary, theft, assault and repeated shoplifting will be freed as little as a third of the way through their sentences, rather than the current 40 per cent, provided they have not committed any serious rule breaches.

It is understood that the first 700 offenders will be freed in September, followed by similar numbers for each of the next nine months in a staggered release plan to get the new system up and running.

Article continues at https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/06/25/killers-rapists-freed-early-first-time-prison-overcrowding/

And at https://archive.is/yPCul

This was announced 6 days ago and somehow never made the news. Only because C4 news today had a segment on it. Interviews with women who have received letters about their rapist being released.

Comment here https://insidetime.org/newsround/earlier-releases-under-sentencing-act-to-start-in-september/

Fucking awful.

The U.K. has swung far too far on the pendulum of looking after perpetrators at the expense of victims and potential victims. Why? So open minded that brains have fallen out.

we need to start writing to our MPs.

How dare these fuckers promise her therapy and support and then not give it 😡

They aren't looking after them.

The management of the UK's economy has been so bad for so many decades that the UK doesn't have the money to run a prison service that matches the number of crimes committed that lead to prison sentences.

So basically they are saying, well the courts are saying you should be locked up as punishment for your crime, but we dont have the money to keep you in prison, so you can go free.

And the public just has to accept that.

We need to start putting down serious sexual offenders. It's hard to see what the alternative is.

I don't see this as a labour problem, incidentally. Pick almost any extended time frame you choose, and the Tories have been in power for the majority of that.

I think it is a UK cultural problem.

Apparently we are the only European country that has a legal system that is similar to the US. (Incidently said to be our common "puritan" heritage and social attitudes of locking up and through away the key. )

Most western european states since WWII have gone for a societal approach. ie people serving time at home, but required to undertake certain obligations and having a society that is more open to this approach.

Have no idea whether over that period of time, crime in European countries has decreased.

France has major prison overcrowding issues. The prison population is surging and places cannot keep up as occupancy rate is running at 130%. I don't think they know how to deal with the increasing prison population.

Sweden also has seen the prison population double over the last decade. Again they have occupancy rates of 130 to 140% so severe overcrowding.

Germany has one of the lowest prison population rates with more emphasis on rehabilitation and this seems to work very well. But the far right political party AfD looks set to take control in the coming elections. Are people in Germany fed up with the soft on crime approach?

I remember hearing a piece on world service about Estonia’s prisons having extra capacity. They now lease out space to some, eg Sweden.

Sweden has, and I dont know the reasons, has had a huge increase in quite voilent, gang related crime. And having previously had like other european countries a more non prison punishment now has a shortage.

A bit different to the UK where it just keeps steadily growing, and has not been planned for.

I tried to find some sort of statistics, and dont know if it is because we are no longer in the EU, but have added extracts from 2 reports to show increase in prison population across (but not all of) Europe.

Comparison of rates of incarceration

• Türkiye+29.0%Highest incarceration rate in Europe (356 per 100k)
• Montenegro+22.0%High density; aging inmate demographic
• Luxembourg+20.0%Sharp rebound from a major decline in prior years
• Sweden+15.0%Ongoing multi-year spike (grew 15.5% the prior year)
• Greece+14.0%Contributing to localized capacity strains
• Croatia+11.0%Facing severe overcrowding alongside population growth
• Bosnia & Herzegovina+8.2%Steady upward trend across federal systems
• Latvia+8.0%One of the highest baseline EU prisoner rates (187 per 100k)
• Finland+7.2%Notable jump, though baseline remains low (57 per 100k)
• France+6.6%Driven by longer sentences and severe cell overcrowding
• Northern Ireland (UK)+6.9%94Fast-growing, but still the lowest total rate in the UK.
• Scotland (UK)+6.7%148Highest baseline rate in Western Europe; near total structural capacity.
• England & Wales (UK)+6.4%141Massive total volume; growing heavily due to sentence lengths.
• Ireland+5.4%89Mirroring the UK's growth patterns.
• Germany+0.0% (Stable)68System remains stable due to decarceration policies.

For serious crimes? Like rape and other violent crimes?

For comparison (though suspect systems are so different hard to produce genuine comparisons)

• United States | +2.0% | 542 | One of the highest baseline rates in the world; populations are creeping back up post-pandemic, heavily sustained by long sentence durations and minor parole violations.
• Canada | +5.3% | 98 | Clings closely to the Western European baseline; experiencing a modern uptick driven primarily by severe backlogs in the court system keeping unconvicted people stuck in provincial remand jails.

According to AI which isn't always a reliable research assistant, it says:

While the statutory frameworks of almost all European nations technically mandate prison terms for rape, judicial tools such as suspended sentences, probationary orders, and community service hours frequently allow perpetrators to avoid immediate custodial time, particularly if they are young, have no prior criminal record, or if the court identifies mitigating factors.
European Countries with Community Sentences for Rape

The Czech Republic: Data shows that the Czech Republic heavily utilizes community-based sentences for rape convictions. Between 2016 and 2022, 46% of convicted rapists received suspended sentences, and an additional 11% received suspended sentences paired with probation. Only 40% faced immediate prison time.

Belgium: Belgian criminal courts have the authority to substitute prison sentences with community service. For example, the Liège and Arlon criminal courts have issued sentences of 150 to 160 hours of community service instead of immediate five-year prison terms in cases involving alcohol-fueled assaults or where psychological assessments were deemed "favourable".]

Germany: Under German juvenile and young adult criminal law, judges lean heavily toward rehabilitation. In high-profile cases involving teenage offenders (aged 14 to 17), courts have issued suspended sentences of 16 to 24 months combined with probation or mandatory youth counseling, allowing the convicted individuals to remain in the community.

United Kingdom (Scotland): While England and Wales have strictly tightened laws to ensure adult rapists serve 100% of their time in prison, the Scottish judicial framework differs. Scottish judges can issue a Community Payback Order (CPO) instead of prison. In multiple instances, this has resulted in convicted young rapists being sentenced to community-based supervision and unpaid work rather than detention.

How Judges Justify Non-Custodial Sentences

When a European court allows a convicted rapist to serve time in the community, it is typically driven by three legal concepts:

• The Age of the Offender: European legal systems treat minors (under 18) and "young adults" (typically 18–21) with an extreme focus on rehabilitation over retribution. In countries like Germany or the UK, a clean record mixed with "intellectual limitations" or "low risk of reoffending" can trigger community orders.
• The "Lack of Violence" Paradox: In countries using older force-based rape laws (where the prosecution must prove physical violence or active resistance), cases that involve a victim "freezing" or being heavily intoxicated are sometimes treated by judges as lower-severity offences. This frequently leads to shorter, fully suspended sentences.
• Suspended Sentence Thresholds: Across much of Western and Central Europe, any prison sentence under two years can be - and routinely is - automatically suspended by a judge. If the court calculates that mitigating factors bring the sentence down to 24 months or less, the perpetrator stays out of prison entirely.

(You'll probably find if you google this that someone has written a book or a research paper on differing attitudes to rape.)

There’s not much evidence that rapists and paedophiles can be rehabilitated. Therefore incarceration becomes the only real way of keeping people safe.

If there’s any room for more enlightened approaches, it needs to come at a societal level before men become offenders. Tackle and combat misogyny and violence in childhood.

Agree. Also medical castration. If these men are to be out in society because prison doesn't work or because they are full maybe we need to look at further ways to protect women and children.

It's very difficult to square that the ringleader of prolific child rape and torture gangs should be out of prison having not served his original IMO piss poor sentence at the same time as someone like Lucy Connolly is in prison for 2 years for a tweet.

I mean whatever you think about what she transiently posted on X (for a couple of hours IIRC), it seems like it would be much better for the rapist paedophile and rapist paedophile ring organiser to be in prison for 2 extra years given that he self-evidently will pose a much greater threat. I think it says something about our government and their priorities. And their concern for human rights of victims vs human rights of rapists.

The impact on the grooming gang victims AND their children and their human rights appear to be nowhere in this process.

It's a very well repeated story that Ruby tells. There's a triggernometry interview with 'Jade'. She was also treated without human rights by the state and never got any help at all - in fact she was demonised - she only got help via the Maggie Oliver Foundation. Too many people in power (sadly women included) just don't see these women and girls as human seemingly. It's so very upsetting.

Lucy Connelly was let out of prison on probation after having served 40% of her sentence. She is not still in prison. She has not been in prison for over a year. So while I'm shocked by (and disagree with) the possibility of convicted rapists being eligible for early release, contrasting this with the image of a woman languishing in prison for tweets is false.

She also was specifically sentenced for inciting violence. If I told someone they should burn a house down or rob a casino I would be potentially a co-conspirator in any crimes they committed. Me writing that on social media instead of saying it doesn't magically make me untouchable. Lucy Connelly pleaded guilty to this and her sentence reflected the guilty plea. Part of the point of probation is supposed to be the idea the prisoner has reformed. Since this absolutely doesn't appear to be the case with Connelly it would rather suggest.there are issues with probation in general. But on the other hand, if there is overcrowding it's still better she was released than someone else.

But comparing the way Lucy Connelly was treated (contrary to popular opinion with kid gloves by the media and justice system) as a well of, middle class, middle aged woman who admitted to committing a serious crime (inciting violence is a crime even if you use Twitter to do it) to the plight of the grooming gang victims (working class, children, victims of crime) makes me really uncomfortable. It's like trying to steal someone else's trauma/ill treatment to make someone else a martyr.

I just am really uncomfortable with people being put in prison for words not actions, particularly words where there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever they've had an impact on anyone else, when actual rapes are so poorly punished, to be honest.

Lucy Connolly was a TA, she had no inflluence to make anyone do anything, there is no evidence that she incited anything and she deleted her tweet within hours. No-one would even know about her tweet if the police and CPS hadn't decided to make an example of her. Her sentence was a travesty and it's not only her who's been locked up for saying things the establishment don't like.

The point is you can't on the one hand say there's not enough prison space for child rapists and on the other hand be wasting prison, court and police resources on words. Graham Linehan being arrested by 5 armed police officers is another example, whilst many of the rape gang victims can't get the police to do anything about credible threats.

A fine for Lucy Connolly would have been proportionate (and that's why she pled guilty, to save her child being deprived their Mum, she was terribly mislead by her solicitor at the time from the sounds of it as she thought doing so would keep her out of prison). Plenty of men with the worst child sex abuse images walk free, some rapists walk free. It's ridiculous.

And actually if you listen to what Lucy Connolly has to say, rather than what people say about her, she's become a real champion for many of the working-class women locked up with her in prison, with whom she became friends. She says many of them should not be there.

Maybe they could let some women out, and repurpose some women's prisons into men's to keep the rapist paedophiles in prison longer.

Labour are building new prisons and expanding other provision to create 14000 more prison spaces but this wont happen overnight. When they took over the system was on the verge of collapse, at one point there were fewer than 100 places available. I dont think early release is their preferred option but there doesn't seem to be much alternative

I don't really have a problem with alternatives to prison for non violent crimes, fraud etc but there are plenty of people locked up for things that aren't child rape. Child rapists should not get out early, nor murderers.